Living in liberal western Massachusetts often feels quite like existing in a vacuum of liberalism and humanistic ideals. It's always a wake-up call when reality strikes through the news. backyard.
This morning it struck like a thunderbolt. I was driving to work and heard an NPR piece entitled
In Quiverful Movement, Birth Control is Shunned. The headline itself is not particularly drastic news from Christian fundamentalists but the news story that unfolded was, to me, one of the more offensive and disturbing I've heard in a long time.
It's nothing new that many fundamentalist Christians like to procreate as many Christian babies as they can. What was shocking to me were the words of some of the people interviewed for the piece.
Nancy Campbell, a leader of the Quiverfull movement and author of Be Fruitful and Multiply had this to say: "The womb is such a powerful weapon; it's a weapon against the enemy."
Read More +/-
Showing posts with label christians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label christians. Show all posts
Wednesday
Talking About Religion And Absurdity ...
... things could not get any worse in this respect - to whit (emphasis added):
Read More +/-
Bill in Texas would allow creationists to grant Masters of Science degreesHere's what "M.Sc." means:
If a private college doesn't receive funds from any governmental organization, should they have to be held to any standards or requirements when they award degrees? No, one Texan lawmaker is insisting.
Texas State Representative Leo Berman has proposed House Bill 2800, which would exempt any private non-profit institution that requires students to complete “substantive course work” from having to acquire a certificate of authority from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board(THECB). “If you don’t take any federal funds, if you don’t take any state funds, you can do a lot more than some business that does take state funding or federal funding,” Berman says. “Why should you be regulated if you don’t take any state or federal funding?”
Because creationism isn't science, critics argue.
Berman admits that his 'inspiration' for the bill was the Institute for Creation Research Graduate School, a Young Earth Creationism institution that has been trying to achieve certification in Texas for two years. Young Earth Creationism, much more popular than the recent Intelligent Design Creationism, is essentially Biblical literalism – Earth is 10,000 years old, Noah's Flood occurred, Adam and Eve were real people. ICRGS insists that they teach more than just “Biblical Creationism," which is based only on the word of the Bible; they also have incorporated tenets of “Scientific Creationism” into their bylaws. Most of these relate to origins of Earth and the evolution of species. Originally the creationist research branch of Christian Heritage College in San Diego, the ICRGS was forced to split from that college when California regulators threatened to take away its certification. Now, the ICRGS operates mostly online, and its Masters of Science Degree is recognized by California and federal law. According to its website, however, Texas residents cannot receive a degree.
Degree-granting colleges and universities in Texas currently must be issued a certificate of authority by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The certificate allows the holder to grant a degree that a graduate would need to apply for a teaching position in a Texas public school. If House Bill 2800 was made into law, only state-funded colleges and universities would have to report to THECB; everyone else would be free to design their curriculums without any regulation.
A Master of Science (Latin: Magister Scientiæ; abbreviated MSc, M.Sc., M.S. or S.M.) is a postgraduate academic master's degree awarded by universities in a large number of countries. The degree is typically studied for in the sciences.It bears repeating: creationism is not science.
Creationism in fact belongs in theology (at best). Period.
And yet - here we are with such an absurd and ludicrous proposal to allow "private" (i.e. unregulated/unsupervised) institutions to give out M.Sc. degrees in non-sciences, in non-scientific religious/paranormal/supernatural beliefs.
What's next? B.Sc.'s in prayology? M.Sc.'s in demonology? Ph.D.'s in Spiritology?
A chiropractician who understands little about science as a Minister of Science and Technology?
I say again: welcome to the Semi-Dark Ages of superstitious ignorance.
And to think that, in the end, it's all in our heads.
Looks like constant vigilance on our part is de rigueur indeed if we are to prevent our modern, civilized nations from slowly and gradually becoming scientific/technological backwater societies ruled by parochial religious/supernatural beliefs ...
(More such absurdities can be found here, here and here, folks)
(Cross-posted from APOV)
Thursday
8 Prop
I'm sort of weak in my enthusiasm for complicated legal matters, you know? So the title of the Prop 8 video immediately caught my eye: Proposition 8 Made Simple. If you haven't seen this, you have to.
This is the latest from the courts on overturnings Prop 8.
And then I want you to take a look at this video of this yes on prop 8 counter-ad.
This is the latest from the courts on overturnings Prop 8.
And then I want you to take a look at this video of this yes on prop 8 counter-ad.
Tuesday
the war on christmas- and other things
so, i went to the office cmas party this past weekend- mr. betmo's not mine. my 'office party' is going to consist of me, mr. betmo, 2 cats and a bottle of bully hill sweet walter white. and it will be infinitely less tedious. and there are oddly enough- right wing christians in the financial industry. who would have thought that right winger christian capitalists would go into the financial industry? color me surprised :) wink wink. anyhoo- i generally behave myself because any reader familar with my posts here, there and over at my place- know i have little to no tolerance of christianity these days.
my biggest pet peeve is the fact that these asshats are so incurious about a religion that allegedly rules their lives. these people who believe that mere words and symbols negate an entire religion- so you can't even say 'xmas' let alone write it out. for the record, Xmas is not sacriligous. it doesn't mean "taking the christ out of christmas" it's greek for christ's sake.
"The use of "Χ," derived from Chi, the Greek alphabet initial, as an abbreviation for Christ (most commonly in the abbreviation "Χmas") is often misinterpreted as a modern secularization of the term. Thus understood, the centuries-old English word Χmas, is actually a shortened form of CHmas, which is, itself, a shortened form for Christmas. In fact, the use of "Χ" to represent the full word goes back to the earliest days of Greek Christianity."
but, don't try and educate these people- who generally get upset over being called on the fact that the holiday season encompasses chanukah, christmas, eid-ul-adha, and kwanzaa- not to mention celebrating the winter solstice. nope- they feel victimized by the fact that they aren't allowed to put creches on courthouse lawns and that private business have employees say 'happy holidays' instead of 'merry cmas'- even though you only ever hear cmas music piped out of every speaker in the northern hemisphere. mr. betmo has held firm on including other religions being represented in his office if there will be christmas displays- and i support him wholeheartedly. i am not anti-christmas. i am anti-christian. the two are mutually exclusive.
so, in the alleged season of peace while the christians sing 'silent night'- i wonder if they will truly listen to the words and read the words of their bible regarding 'the prince of peace?' nah. if they haven't in the last 2,000+ years- what would make me think that they would now?
my biggest pet peeve is the fact that these asshats are so incurious about a religion that allegedly rules their lives. these people who believe that mere words and symbols negate an entire religion- so you can't even say 'xmas' let alone write it out. for the record, Xmas is not sacriligous. it doesn't mean "taking the christ out of christmas" it's greek for christ's sake.
"The use of "Χ," derived from Chi, the Greek alphabet initial, as an abbreviation for Christ (most commonly in the abbreviation "Χmas") is often misinterpreted as a modern secularization of the term. Thus understood, the centuries-old English word Χmas, is actually a shortened form of CHmas, which is, itself, a shortened form for Christmas. In fact, the use of "Χ" to represent the full word goes back to the earliest days of Greek Christianity."
but, don't try and educate these people- who generally get upset over being called on the fact that the holiday season encompasses chanukah, christmas, eid-ul-adha, and kwanzaa- not to mention celebrating the winter solstice. nope- they feel victimized by the fact that they aren't allowed to put creches on courthouse lawns and that private business have employees say 'happy holidays' instead of 'merry cmas'- even though you only ever hear cmas music piped out of every speaker in the northern hemisphere. mr. betmo has held firm on including other religions being represented in his office if there will be christmas displays- and i support him wholeheartedly. i am not anti-christmas. i am anti-christian. the two are mutually exclusive.
so, in the alleged season of peace while the christians sing 'silent night'- i wonder if they will truly listen to the words and read the words of their bible regarding 'the prince of peace?' nah. if they haven't in the last 2,000+ years- what would make me think that they would now?
Wednesday
A Dear John Letter...
I don't blame Governor Palin.
The responsibility lies solely at your feet.
You, sir, are seen as a war hero by many, including myself, but aren’t war heroes supposed to be heroic?
Your use of "Country First" was shameful and it became quite evident that it was an empty slogan when you chose Sarah Palin as your running mate because someone told you that it would fire up the base and that it would miraculously shore up the Hillary vote. Of course all it shored up was animosity towards you for having used such a transparent tactic against the American electorate thus proving that you have no respect for their intellect and reasoning skills. Never underestimate your audience. Never.
You thrust an unknown governor and first dude and their innocent children into an untenable and preposterous situation.
No. I do not blame you for her actions, after the fact. I do, however, blame you for allowing the use of her as cutthroat surrogate to a rabid base and for you selling your principles and your very soul for god-awful power!
I blame you for sucking up to the Christian fringe and for cozying up to the lobbyists and big oil!
I blame you, Mr. McCain for using your veteran status as a stepping stone for your hubris without thinking of what it is that you were doing to yourself, the nation, war veterans, African Americans, Muslim Americans, Native Americans, the world’s perception of our country, women, gays and lesbians, and senior citizens!
Your doom, I believe, along with many others, began when you visited Liberty University six years after having labeled the Reverend Jerry Falwell one of the political "agents of intolerance". Licking your chops at the possibility of holding the highest office in the land you got your ass in line and kissed the symbolic ring of the contemptuous Christian alliance that is hell-bent on this countries destruction. I find this, not only cowardly on your part, but to have placed a nasty pox upon your record and, simply put, it was precisely where your mavericky demise took root.
Your story of the Vietnamese guard drawing a cross in the dirt with his sandal while you were a POW, which you say is true and I’ve no reason to dispute it, sounded false and your use of such a tale at the Saddleback Church wasn’t you employing a personal and inspirational story to guide sad sacks to God, or as some philosophical anecdote to shed light upon some theory of forgiveness existing within all men, but instead you only used it to shore up your base. The “congregation" and many people watching your performance on television sucked it up like hungry calves on a domesticated ungulate’s teat! It was shameful to say the least. It also proved to the millions of others watching that you would say and do anything to capture the throne. Why the "Christians" could not see this transparent attempt can only be explained by the following verse, “When you take the timber out of your own eye, then you will see well enough to remove the sliver from your friend's eye.” In other words, they are blinded by allegiance for supremacy as much as you.
But what really irked me was your inability to curb your racist and bigoted base during the campaign, or more accurately, it was your complicit silence as the ugliness, spawned by your own shameful rhetoric, began to audibly boil over during your kkkampaign rallies. As shameful as that was, it was more shameful when your interest in the quelling of such was peaked only when it became a liability to your campaign. Your behavior is not something that shall soon be forgotten, nor should it be. Your campaign was more despicable than the man’s you hoped to succeed, and that certainly must not have been a cakewalk!
So, you may sense that many of your fellow citizens are blaming Sarah Palin for you and your party’s demise, but please understand that your inane choice of a running mate was merely a byproduct of your own sickly sweet hubris and shallow principles and your base’s lack of a soul.
Sincerely,
thepoetryman
The Primitive Mind-Thinking Syndrome
Here is the primitive mind of Sarah Stillson Palin the parochial theocon at work:
So instead, I'll let Dr. P.Z. Myers speak my mind:I am appalled.
This idiot woman, this blind, shortsighted ignoramus, this pretentious clod, mocks basic research and the international research community. You damn well better believe that there is research going on in animal models — what does she expect, that scientists should mutagenize human mothers and chop up baby brains for this work? — and countries like France and Germany and England and Canada and China and India and others are all respected participants in these efforts.
Yes, scientists work on fruit flies. Some of the most powerful tools in genetics and molecular biology are available in fruit flies, and these are animals that are particularly amenable to experimentation. Molecular genetics has revealed that humans share key molecules, the basic developmental toolkit, with all other animals, thanks to our shared evolutionary heritage (something else the wackaloon from Wasilla denies), and that we can use these other organisms to probe the fundamental mechanisms that underlie core processes in the formation of the nervous system — precisely the phenomena Palin claims are so important. To be frank, I am far from surprised - because that is how intellectual sloth-afflicted primitive minds think - of which Sarah Stillson Palin constitutes a "fine" example:It never ceases to amaze me to what levels of utter irrationality the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are willing to descend into.
They lie, they misrepresent, they use decoy arguments and make ad hominem attacks. For them, the use of duplicity, of secrecy, of arguments of (non-existent) conspiracy, of fact (and non-fact) selectivity/cherry-picking, of quacks/fake experts, as well as putting forth logical fallacies, are simply means to an end.
And this "end" is the following: to promulgate, support and defend their beliefs or their ideologies.
Truth be told: these are the only things that truly matter to them.
Why else would they try to censor science, attempt to control it, seek to falsify it or rewrite it, quietly hide it, brazenly deny funding for it, attempt to change its mission/purpose, actually lie about it, use spin games to deny it, go to great lenghts to confuse people about it, attempt to dismiss it as a matter of differing beliefs or philosophies, or go as far as to demonize it?
Why else would they use the politics of fear, ignorance and lies? Now, here's why they do so:(...) the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are very much alike the people from the allegory of the cave, and somehow made flesh and blood.
They are indeed living in a cave, their backs to the entrance while facing the sunlit cave wall, seeing only shadows of reality. And it is from watching these two-dimensional shadows that they construct myths and stories to comfort themselves - because they not only fear the shadows that they see, but they also fear even more what these shadows represent.
Thus, they find themselves frightened to the deepest levels of their fragile souls by the glorious truth of the multi-dimensional reality in which we live, whenever they get out of their cave. Their intellectual sloth-driven, ignorant and fearful minds simply can not, or flatly refuse, to comprehend it.
That is why their beliefs and ideologies are not only parochial, but adamantly intractable.
Consequently, at the end of each day, the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters return to the safety and comfort of their cave, vowing to say and do everything in order to transform our multi-dimensional reality into the simpler, two-dimensional one made of shadows that they are accustomed to.
Hence, my conclusion is that the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are the same ignorant, fearful and surperstitious primitives that our ancestors were, thousands upon thousands of years ago - except that they now use newspapers, magazines, television, radio, politics, and the internet, to spread their intellectual sloth-driven non-understanding of the world and, consequently, working hard at bringing us down to their level of ignorance. To which I add: that, coupled to their pathetic inhability to accept - or deal with - reality, along with their typical shameless hypocrisy in trying to justify any and all duplicity on their part in the face of whatever self-deluded moral ground du jour that they claim, make them not only nothing more than primitive minds, but utter incompetent modern human beings as well.
The result is the fierce undercurrent of anti-intellectualism, anti-science and tribalist-racism that bubbles up increasingly to the surface (especially thanks to the recent strategy of the McCain-Palin campaign), despite these modern, scientific and technological times of ours. It's what I've come to call our "Semi-Dark Ages". A few cases in point:Congressman Rohrabacher's Floor Speech on Global Warming: "(Are we to believe) buffalo farts have more socially redeeming value than the same flatulence emitted by cattle?"
Bachmann Calls For McCarthyite Investigation Into Anti-American Activities Of Liberals;
Sarah Palin Says She Open To Teaching Creationism In Public Schools;
Palin Claimed Dinosaurs And People Coexisted;
Palin Explains What Parts Of Country Not "Pro-America";
Bachmann: ‘Not all cultures are equal’;
Palin: Iraq is a task "from God";
Conservatives Call Obama’s Correct Pronounciation Of Pakistan ‘Exotic’ And ‘Annoying’;
Palin Sees America As Wealthy And White: New Hampshire And Alaska Are ‘Microcosms’ Of The Country;
Another McCarthyite Republican: Rep. Robin Hayes says “liberals hate real Americans that work and achieve and believe in God";
Bachmann tells Pelosi to give up on global warming because Jesus already saved the planet;
McCain: Washington D.C. and NYC = Fake America;
Racism, hate bubble up yet again at Palin's rally in Vegas. Thus I give you primitive mind-thinking at work - and I could go on and on and on with further examples, just for this year alone.
Oh - and the fruit fly thing? Here's but one example of how useful the knowledge of its cellular and molecular biology as a scientific, experimental animal model has lead to a better understanding of human diseases:
New Treatment Strategy Possible For Muscular Dystrophy, Mouse Studies Show. In case you would want to know more, instead of being a primitive mind like Sarah Stillson Palin, you might want to begin here, here, here and here - and from there, you may go as deep as you want.
(And be most welcome to my world, as well as that of all cellular and molecular biologists, geneticists, biochemists, etc.)
Feed your mind, eh?
(Cross-posted from APOV)
This morning, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) gave her first policy speech urging the federal government to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), “a law ensuring services to children with disabilities throughout the nation.” In the speech, Palin cited the need to do more for children with disabilities such as autism:
For many parents of children with disabilities, the most valuable thing of all is information. Early identification of a cognitive or other disorder, especially autism, can make a life-changing difference.
Palin claimed that the amount that Congress spends on earmarks “is more than the shortfall to fully fund IDEA.” She then ridiculed some of the projects — such as “fruit fly research” — saying they have little or no value:
Where does a lot of that earmark money end up anyway? […] You’ve heard about some of these pet projects they really don’t make a whole lot of sense and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not.
Watch it:
So instead, I'll let Dr. P.Z. Myers speak my mind:I am appalled.
This idiot woman, this blind, shortsighted ignoramus, this pretentious clod, mocks basic research and the international research community. You damn well better believe that there is research going on in animal models — what does she expect, that scientists should mutagenize human mothers and chop up baby brains for this work? — and countries like France and Germany and England and Canada and China and India and others are all respected participants in these efforts.
Yes, scientists work on fruit flies. Some of the most powerful tools in genetics and molecular biology are available in fruit flies, and these are animals that are particularly amenable to experimentation. Molecular genetics has revealed that humans share key molecules, the basic developmental toolkit, with all other animals, thanks to our shared evolutionary heritage (something else the wackaloon from Wasilla denies), and that we can use these other organisms to probe the fundamental mechanisms that underlie core processes in the formation of the nervous system — precisely the phenomena Palin claims are so important. To be frank, I am far from surprised - because that is how intellectual sloth-afflicted primitive minds think - of which Sarah Stillson Palin constitutes a "fine" example:It never ceases to amaze me to what levels of utter irrationality the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are willing to descend into.
They lie, they misrepresent, they use decoy arguments and make ad hominem attacks. For them, the use of duplicity, of secrecy, of arguments of (non-existent) conspiracy, of fact (and non-fact) selectivity/cherry-picking, of quacks/fake experts, as well as putting forth logical fallacies, are simply means to an end.
And this "end" is the following: to promulgate, support and defend their beliefs or their ideologies.
Truth be told: these are the only things that truly matter to them.
Why else would they try to censor science, attempt to control it, seek to falsify it or rewrite it, quietly hide it, brazenly deny funding for it, attempt to change its mission/purpose, actually lie about it, use spin games to deny it, go to great lenghts to confuse people about it, attempt to dismiss it as a matter of differing beliefs or philosophies, or go as far as to demonize it?
Why else would they use the politics of fear, ignorance and lies? Now, here's why they do so:(...) the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are very much alike the people from the allegory of the cave, and somehow made flesh and blood.
They are indeed living in a cave, their backs to the entrance while facing the sunlit cave wall, seeing only shadows of reality. And it is from watching these two-dimensional shadows that they construct myths and stories to comfort themselves - because they not only fear the shadows that they see, but they also fear even more what these shadows represent.
Thus, they find themselves frightened to the deepest levels of their fragile souls by the glorious truth of the multi-dimensional reality in which we live, whenever they get out of their cave. Their intellectual sloth-driven, ignorant and fearful minds simply can not, or flatly refuse, to comprehend it.
That is why their beliefs and ideologies are not only parochial, but adamantly intractable.
Consequently, at the end of each day, the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters return to the safety and comfort of their cave, vowing to say and do everything in order to transform our multi-dimensional reality into the simpler, two-dimensional one made of shadows that they are accustomed to.
Hence, my conclusion is that the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are the same ignorant, fearful and surperstitious primitives that our ancestors were, thousands upon thousands of years ago - except that they now use newspapers, magazines, television, radio, politics, and the internet, to spread their intellectual sloth-driven non-understanding of the world and, consequently, working hard at bringing us down to their level of ignorance. To which I add: that, coupled to their pathetic inhability to accept - or deal with - reality, along with their typical shameless hypocrisy in trying to justify any and all duplicity on their part in the face of whatever self-deluded moral ground du jour that they claim, make them not only nothing more than primitive minds, but utter incompetent modern human beings as well.
The result is the fierce undercurrent of anti-intellectualism, anti-science and tribalist-racism that bubbles up increasingly to the surface (especially thanks to the recent strategy of the McCain-Palin campaign), despite these modern, scientific and technological times of ours. It's what I've come to call our "Semi-Dark Ages". A few cases in point:Congressman Rohrabacher's Floor Speech on Global Warming: "(Are we to believe) buffalo farts have more socially redeeming value than the same flatulence emitted by cattle?"
Bachmann Calls For McCarthyite Investigation Into Anti-American Activities Of Liberals;
Sarah Palin Says She Open To Teaching Creationism In Public Schools;
Palin Claimed Dinosaurs And People Coexisted;
Palin Explains What Parts Of Country Not "Pro-America";
Bachmann: ‘Not all cultures are equal’;
Palin: Iraq is a task "from God";
Conservatives Call Obama’s Correct Pronounciation Of Pakistan ‘Exotic’ And ‘Annoying’;
Palin Sees America As Wealthy And White: New Hampshire And Alaska Are ‘Microcosms’ Of The Country;
Another McCarthyite Republican: Rep. Robin Hayes says “liberals hate real Americans that work and achieve and believe in God";
Bachmann tells Pelosi to give up on global warming because Jesus already saved the planet;
McCain: Washington D.C. and NYC = Fake America;
Racism, hate bubble up yet again at Palin's rally in Vegas. Thus I give you primitive mind-thinking at work - and I could go on and on and on with further examples, just for this year alone.
Oh - and the fruit fly thing? Here's but one example of how useful the knowledge of its cellular and molecular biology as a scientific, experimental animal model has lead to a better understanding of human diseases:
Palin did not specify what fruit fly research earmark she was referring to (presumably a grant for olive fruit fly research), but she is apparently unaware that scientific research with fruit flies has led to valuable discoveries that have boosted autism research, as a study at the University of North Carolina demonstrated last year:
[S]cientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine have shown that a protein called neurexin is required for ... nerve cell connections to form and function correctly.
The discovery, made in Drosophila fruit flies may lead to advances in understanding autism spectrum disorders, as recently, human neurexins have been identified as a genetic risk factor for autism.
The study of fruit flies has also been used for other autism research and “revolutionize[d]” the study of birth defects.
Other animal models, such as laboratory mice, are likewise extremely useful in understanding our own genetics, physiology and diseases. Just two cases in point among countless others:First-ever Genetic Animal Model Of Autism;New Treatment Strategy Possible For Muscular Dystrophy, Mouse Studies Show. In case you would want to know more, instead of being a primitive mind like Sarah Stillson Palin, you might want to begin here, here, here and here - and from there, you may go as deep as you want.
(And be most welcome to my world, as well as that of all cellular and molecular biologists, geneticists, biochemists, etc.)
Feed your mind, eh?
(Cross-posted from APOV)
Tuesday
Church of England apologizes to Darwin for rejecting evolution. Will Sarah Palin's church follow suit? Yeah right!
The Church of England will concede in a statement that it was over-defensive and over-emotional in dismissing Darwin's ideas. It will call "anti-evolutionary fervour" an "indictment" on the Church".The bold move is certain to dismay sections of the Church that believe in creationism and regard Darwin's views as directly opposed to traditional Christian teaching.
The apology, which has been written by the Rev Dr Malcolm Brown, the Church's director of mission and public affairs, says that Christians, in their response to Darwin's theory of natural selection, repeated the mistakes they made in doubting Galileo's astronomy in the 17th century.
"The statement will read: Charles Darwin: 200 years from your birth, the Church of England owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still. We try to practise the old virtues of 'faith seeking understanding' and hope that makes some amends."
Opposition to evolutionary theories is still "a litmus test of faithfulness" for some Christian movements, the Church will admit. It will say that such attitudes owe much to a fear of perceived threats to Christianity.
Sadly many in the Christian church have consistently attempted to stall or completely stop scientific progress multiple times in our history, especially when it challenges their belief system.
The church also attempted to deny the significance of psychology and challenged the findings of Sigmund Freud. They also attacked the work of Galileo, as well as Copernicus, and of course Charles Darwin , whose scientific findings clearly angered and frightened the church which resulted in a number of responses ranging from argument, to character assassination, to the actual prosecution of Galileo Galilei.
But in these modern times continuing to deny the enlightenment that science brings while promoting the teaching of superstition in the place of real education should be labeled child abuse in my opinion. And those who insist on forestalling the intellectual growth of our young people should be kept at a distance so that their negative impact can be minimized.
And that is just what Sarah Palin and her church are promoting. The watering down of a science that may present a challenge to their belief system. And the proof of that is in quotes such as this: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides." Sarah Palin October 2006.
Of course the problem with this concept of "fairness" is that only ONE of these can be considered science. Evolution has been tested, and challenged, and tested again for two hundred years and has stood up to evaluation by the greatest scientific minds in history.
Creationism requires nothing more then faith. There is NO scientific data that favors it over evolution, and therefore it deserves no place in any of the classrooms that our children attend. And NOBODY who has any doubts about that should be allowed to shape policy in this great nation, for if they do our nation may not remain "great" for very much longer.
Update: Apparently not EVERYBODY in England got the memo.
Thursday
Just Say No to Abstinance-Only Sex Education
Comprehensive sex education and abstinence-only sex education for adolescents actually have a lot in common. Both strive to teach teens the benefits of delaying sexual activity. However, in abstinence-only curricula, the emphasis is on delaying sexual experiences until marriage. Both warn of the dangers of HIV and STDs as well as unplanned pregnancy. Again, the methods by which the respective approaches differ in protecting the health of teens, are different.
Comprehensive sex education strives to teach that if teens are going to engage in sexual activity, they should take measures to protect themselves from HIV and other STDs as well as accidental pregnancy. Abstinence only teaches only what the name implies: abstinence.
But that rate peaked eight years before abstinence-only education came to the fore and has been declining steadily ever since. And children born to teenage girls still account for 11.5 percent of all births in the United States
The Mathematica Policy Research study on abstinence education looked at four different abstinence education programs that were selected as subjects for a long-term evaluation. This study reported that teen participants in these abstinence programs did not abstain from sexual activity more than non-participants, when measured 2½ to 5½ years after the program ended.
Further, in December 2004, a report released by Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) surveyed many of the curricula used in the programs reviewed by the Mathematica study and found that they contain false, misleading, and distorted information about the risks of sexual activity. The report examined the accuracy of the most popular curricula used by federally funded abstinence-only education programs and found more than two-thirds of these programs distort information and mislead young people by giving them false information about abortion and contraception, particularly about the effectiveness of condoms.
How do American teens, parents and teachers feel about abstinence-only sex education programs? This from International Planned Parenthood:
Surveys of teachers, parents and young people consistently show little support for abstinence education. In the US a recent major survey found overwhelming support for sex education in school and little local controversy about its provision and organisation within schools. However, the survey did find some differences in parental views on the focus it should have with 46% preferring an abstinence-plus approach, 36% a comprehensive approach and 15% abstinence only.
Advocates For Youth takes this position:
Each year, U.S. teens experience as many as 850,000 pregnancies, and youth under age 25 experience about 9.1 million sexually transmitted infections (STIs). By age 18, 70 percent of U.S. females and 62 percent of U.S. males have initiated vaginal sex. Comprehensive sex education is effective at assisting young people to make healthy decisions about sex and to adopt healthy sexual behaviors. No abstinence-only-until-marriage program has been shown to help teens delay the initiation of sex or to protect themselves when they do initiate sex. Yet, the U.S. government has spent over one billion dollars supporting abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. Although the U.S. government ignores it, adolescents have a fundamental human right to accurate and comprehensive sexual health information.
In the face of these findings, President Bush proposed a 2008 budget of $204 million for abstinence only sex education programs.
I found some hope in this Salon article:
As evidence of the ineffectiveness of abstinence-only programs stacks up, a growing number of states are saying: "Keep the money, please. We don't want it!" At least 14 states are taking a stance against wasting federal funds on sex education programs that not only don't work but are potentially harmful, and are rejecting their share of the $176 million annual budget. As Ned Calonge, chief medical officer of the Colorado Department of Health, put it: "Why would we spend tax dollars on something that doesn't work?"
Let's hope the trend continues and get down to the work of teaching kids what's right for them, rather than what's right for the fundy-Christians' distorted view of sexuality.
Sunday
Wednesday
The Age Of The President-Pontificate Of The U.S.A.
Last week's Saddleback Civil Forum on Presidency, quite appropriately dubbed "The Faith Forum", heralded a new age for the Presidency of the U.S.A. - that of the President-Pontificate.
EXPAND THE POST +/-
For decades now, especially since the late 70's-early 80's, it has become a ritual of sorts for candidates seeking the Office of the Presidency of the U.S.A. (POTUS) to make profuse declarations of faith while seeking the public support of pastors, preachers and priests.
Pious demonstrations of belief in God (the Christian one, of course), humble statements of abundant praying for guidance from the Divine Will, public displays of church attendance, etc. - all such things have become nothing more than par for the course in the (democratic) process of choosing the next POTUS.
Through it all, the political/governing functions of a POTUS have likewise become intimately intertwined with all matters of faith - whether it is the expected utterance of the incantation of "God Bless America", frequent references to God on any and all subject matter (policies, decisions, etc.), the White House prayer breakfasts, the lighting of the White House's Christmas Tree, attending Christmas mass, yet more public displays of piety and praying/church attending, and so on and so forth.
In short - the POTUS has come to acquire an increasingly preeminent function of "Christian faith representative" in the eyes of Americans throughout the years.
Why else would Americans have elected three openly-declared Born Again Christian Presidents (Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush) out of the last five who have held office since the 1976 elections?
No wonder then that so-called "moral values" and "moral issues" have come to dominate the American political landscape in the last three decades or so - especially with regards to school praying vs. no praying at school, a woman's right to choose vs. criminalizing abortion, same-sex marriage allowance vs. interdiction, teaching safe/protected sex vs. promoting abstinence, teaching evolution vs. also teaching creationism/intelligent design, etc., etc., etc.
And I will spare you the all-too-known details of the (waning) George W. Bush administration's embrace of fundamentalist Christian "values" and consequent attitudes/actions with regards to all things secular and scientific (see also this recent post of yours truly).
(I remember cringing at that little piece of news when I first read about it some three years ago - that one as well)
Then came 9/11 - and since that tragic day a majority of Americans have apparently locked themselves in a mentality of "Christianity vs. Islam" - what some like to call the "Clash of Civilizations" - a mindset which appears to stubbornly persist to this day, overriding all rational considerations (one more recent example here).
Indeed, 9/11 was in good part responsible for the re-election of George W. Bush, the "War President" fighting the evil islamofascists ...
Which brings us to this year's primaries and the current contest between John McCain and Barack Obama for the Presidency of the U.S.A.
Never before have I witnessed such profusion of declarations of faith from candidates left and right, being asked questions on all matters of Christian faith, morals and values, including whether they believe in evolution or not.
Never before have I witnessed a democratic party presumptive nominee speak more like a pastor as Barack Obama has been speaking throughout this election year - even more so than the born again Christian Jimmy Carter (and I remember a good part of Carter's campaign and his Presidency, because I had "come of age" enough as a teenager to start paying attention to such things already then).
Never before have I witnessed such lingering (ill-informed, uninformed, or deliberately mendacious) questions concerning the "purity" of the Christian faith of candidates - especially regarding Barack Obama ("Is he Muslim or Christian?", "Is he Christian enough?").
Then came last week's Saddleback Civil Forum on Presidency, whereby McCain and Obama got to be vetted on matters of Christian faith, morals and values by an "influential" evangelical pastor, Rev. Rick Warren, in a live broadcast to millions of Americans to see, hear and judge.
Since then, many have parsed through the questions posed by Warren in this so-called Faith Forum and the answers given by McCain and Obama - however, it appears that the sheer precedent enormity of such an exercise has been lost entirely.
Think about it - before McCain and Obama got to face each other for a first time to debate their political ideas, ideologies, visions and solutions, they got to be quizzed/tested by a pastor first about their Christian faith, morals, values and visions.
In other words: they had to demonstrate first and foremost their Christian credentials to the American people above all other (political) considerations.
Talk about separation of church and state, no?
Since 9/11, the American people, through their Congress and Senate, have granted monarchical powers to the Office of the President of the U.S.A. - the Military Commissions Act and the Patriot Act quickly come to mind as but two examples.
In short, the POTUS can spy indiscriminately, detain indefinitely and torture - the pretense being that all of this is necessary in the name of temporal security of the Homeland.
Not unlike the British Monarchs of old.
And now, thanks to the precedent of last week's Faith Forum, the POTUS has become the de facto Spiritual Leader and Keeper of the American Christian Faith.
Again - not unlike British Monarchs who still retain to this day (since Henry VIII) the title and function of Head of the Church of England.
So after some 230+ years after the Declaration of Independance, the Americans managed to give themselves a bona fides British-like Monarch in all ways, shapes and forms.
Makes me wonder what the hell the American Revolution was for, then.
Yet, the conclusion nevertheless remains: thanks to the fear, ignorance and, yes, hate of Americans regarding things non-christian, all still driven by 9/11, the Age of the President-Pontificate of the U.S.A. has officially arrived.
God Bless America indeed.
(and whenever I hear born again Christian Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, throw "God Bless Canada" whenever and wherever he can, I keep wondering whether my country is slowly but surely going the same way as our neighbors to the south ... but I digress)
In the meantime, all I can do is wish - and hope - that enough people out there will never forget the necessity of keeping church and faith fully and completely separate from state.
But in this new Age of the President-Pontificate, I shan't be holding my breath ...
(Aftermath: go read this and that as well - both are definitely worth the click).
(Cross-posted from APOV)
For decades now, especially since the late 70's-early 80's, it has become a ritual of sorts for candidates seeking the Office of the Presidency of the U.S.A. (POTUS) to make profuse declarations of faith while seeking the public support of pastors, preachers and priests.
Pious demonstrations of belief in God (the Christian one, of course), humble statements of abundant praying for guidance from the Divine Will, public displays of church attendance, etc. - all such things have become nothing more than par for the course in the (democratic) process of choosing the next POTUS.
Through it all, the political/governing functions of a POTUS have likewise become intimately intertwined with all matters of faith - whether it is the expected utterance of the incantation of "God Bless America", frequent references to God on any and all subject matter (policies, decisions, etc.), the White House prayer breakfasts, the lighting of the White House's Christmas Tree, attending Christmas mass, yet more public displays of piety and praying/church attending, and so on and so forth.
In short - the POTUS has come to acquire an increasingly preeminent function of "Christian faith representative" in the eyes of Americans throughout the years.
Why else would Americans have elected three openly-declared Born Again Christian Presidents (Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush) out of the last five who have held office since the 1976 elections?
No wonder then that so-called "moral values" and "moral issues" have come to dominate the American political landscape in the last three decades or so - especially with regards to school praying vs. no praying at school, a woman's right to choose vs. criminalizing abortion, same-sex marriage allowance vs. interdiction, teaching safe/protected sex vs. promoting abstinence, teaching evolution vs. also teaching creationism/intelligent design, etc., etc., etc.
And I will spare you the all-too-known details of the (waning) George W. Bush administration's embrace of fundamentalist Christian "values" and consequent attitudes/actions with regards to all things secular and scientific (see also this recent post of yours truly).
(I remember cringing at that little piece of news when I first read about it some three years ago - that one as well)
Then came 9/11 - and since that tragic day a majority of Americans have apparently locked themselves in a mentality of "Christianity vs. Islam" - what some like to call the "Clash of Civilizations" - a mindset which appears to stubbornly persist to this day, overriding all rational considerations (one more recent example here).
Indeed, 9/11 was in good part responsible for the re-election of George W. Bush, the "War President" fighting the evil islamofascists ...
Which brings us to this year's primaries and the current contest between John McCain and Barack Obama for the Presidency of the U.S.A.
Never before have I witnessed such profusion of declarations of faith from candidates left and right, being asked questions on all matters of Christian faith, morals and values, including whether they believe in evolution or not.
Never before have I witnessed a democratic party presumptive nominee speak more like a pastor as Barack Obama has been speaking throughout this election year - even more so than the born again Christian Jimmy Carter (and I remember a good part of Carter's campaign and his Presidency, because I had "come of age" enough as a teenager to start paying attention to such things already then).
Never before have I witnessed such lingering (ill-informed, uninformed, or deliberately mendacious) questions concerning the "purity" of the Christian faith of candidates - especially regarding Barack Obama ("Is he Muslim or Christian?", "Is he Christian enough?").
Then came last week's Saddleback Civil Forum on Presidency, whereby McCain and Obama got to be vetted on matters of Christian faith, morals and values by an "influential" evangelical pastor, Rev. Rick Warren, in a live broadcast to millions of Americans to see, hear and judge.
Since then, many have parsed through the questions posed by Warren in this so-called Faith Forum and the answers given by McCain and Obama - however, it appears that the sheer precedent enormity of such an exercise has been lost entirely.
Think about it - before McCain and Obama got to face each other for a first time to debate their political ideas, ideologies, visions and solutions, they got to be quizzed/tested by a pastor first about their Christian faith, morals, values and visions.
In other words: they had to demonstrate first and foremost their Christian credentials to the American people above all other (political) considerations.
Talk about separation of church and state, no?
Since 9/11, the American people, through their Congress and Senate, have granted monarchical powers to the Office of the President of the U.S.A. - the Military Commissions Act and the Patriot Act quickly come to mind as but two examples.
In short, the POTUS can spy indiscriminately, detain indefinitely and torture - the pretense being that all of this is necessary in the name of temporal security of the Homeland.
Not unlike the British Monarchs of old.
And now, thanks to the precedent of last week's Faith Forum, the POTUS has become the de facto Spiritual Leader and Keeper of the American Christian Faith.
Again - not unlike British Monarchs who still retain to this day (since Henry VIII) the title and function of Head of the Church of England.
So after some 230+ years after the Declaration of Independance, the Americans managed to give themselves a bona fides British-like Monarch in all ways, shapes and forms.
Makes me wonder what the hell the American Revolution was for, then.
Yet, the conclusion nevertheless remains: thanks to the fear, ignorance and, yes, hate of Americans regarding things non-christian, all still driven by 9/11, the Age of the President-Pontificate of the U.S.A. has officially arrived.
God Bless America indeed.
(and whenever I hear born again Christian Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, throw "God Bless Canada" whenever and wherever he can, I keep wondering whether my country is slowly but surely going the same way as our neighbors to the south ... but I digress)
In the meantime, all I can do is wish - and hope - that enough people out there will never forget the necessity of keeping church and faith fully and completely separate from state.
But in this new Age of the President-Pontificate, I shan't be holding my breath ...
(Aftermath: go read this and that as well - both are definitely worth the click).
(Cross-posted from APOV)
About That Whole "Defining Reality" Thing ...
Remember this (emphasis added)?
READ THE REST OF THE POST +/-
Then again, what else can you expect from people who indulge in echo chamber legalese gymnastics in order to justify uncivilized barbarism and savagery, or who "reason" that simply buying a piece of paper saying "diploma" equals the same as, you know, actually studying and developing expertise to earn a bona fides degree? Indeed (emphasis added):
Hence, my previous conclusion that the fundamentalists, denialists, neocons and other assorted right-wing madhaters are the same ignorant, fearful and surperstitious primitives that our ancestors were, thousands upon thousands of years ago - except that they now use newspapers, magazines, television, radio, politics, and the internet, to spread their intellectual sloth-driven non-understanding of the world and, consequently, working hard at bringing us down to their level of ignorance.
That, coupled to their pathetic inhability to accept - or deal with - reality, along with their typical shameless hypocrisy in trying to justify any and all duplicity on their part in the face of whatever self-deluded moral ground du jour that they claim, make them not only nothing more than primitive minds, but utter incompetent modern human beings as well.
Q.E.D. - yet again.
In the meantime, perhaps it would be wise on the part of the rest of us to dwell seriously on how much overall "progress" exactly we have achieved with our "modern" religions and today's current "belief" systems ...
(Originally posted at APOV)
(...) The (Bush) aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."This of course brings to mind what I wrote last year:
It never ceases to amaze me to what levels of utter irrationality the fundamentalists, neocons and other right-wing madhaters are willing to descend into.Well then - here's that whole "defining/creating reality" thingie in action again, folks (emphasis added):
They lie, they misrepresent, they use decoy arguments and make ad hominem attacks. For them, the use of duplicity, of secrecy, of arguments of (non-existent) conspiracy, of fact (and non-fact) selectivity/cherry-picking, of quacks/fake experts, as well as putting forth logical fallacies, are simply means to an end.
And this "end" is the following: to promulgate, support and defend their beliefs or their ideologies.
Truth be told: these are the only things that truly matter to them.
Why else would they try to censor science, attempt to control it, seek to falsify it or rewrite it, quietly hide it, brazenly deny funding for it, attempt to change its mission/purpose, actually lie about it, use spin games to deny it, go to great lenghts to confuse people about it, attempt to dismiss it as a matter of differing beliefs or philosophies, or go as far as to demonize it?
Why else would they use the politics of fear, ignorance and lies?
Why else would anyone one of them (along with so many others of his ilk) have the gall to repudiate on television the very same President whom they supported relentlessly until a month or so ago - with the "ex-supporter" base even applauding such repudiation?
Why else would they still seek to implement a "missile defense shield" while tests keep proving that it is junk?
Why else would they be comfortable enough to advocate more renditions and more torture ... with the audience actually cheering and applauding?
Why else are they capable of scolding others about democracy while they have been proven as authoritarians by their own words and actions?
Why else do they disassemble so easily, obfuscate swiftly, or use disinformation and propaganda?
Why else do they use euphemisms to hide/conceal their true intentions ("surge" in lieu of escalation, "enhanced interrogation techniques" instead of torture, etc.)
Why else do they promulgate confrontation and war, using overt and duplicitous means, as the solutions for everything?
(And I could go on and on and on ...)
Bush Cronies Tried To Redefine ‘Carbon Dioxide’ To Save Power Plants From Emissions RegulationsTalk about the ends justifying the means in order to promulgate, support and defend their beliefs and/or their ideologies.
Earlier this month, former EPA official Jason Burnett wrote to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) with explosive revelations on how the White House has neutered climate change science to protect corporate interests. For example, OMB general counsel Jeffrey Rosen asked for multiple memos on whether carbon dioxide (CO2) from cars and plants could be regulated differently.
In a Senate hearing today, Burnett further explained that under the Clear Air Act, “after a pollutant is a regulated pollutant, controls are required on a variety of sources.” During the “inter-agency process,” Burnett said, OMB officials looked for ways to define CO2 from power plants as different from CO2 from automobiles, in order to shield industrial power plants from regulation under the landmark Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA:
BURNETT: There was quite a bit of effort and interest to see whether the Supreme Court case itself and regulation of CO2 and other greenhouse gases from automobiles be restricted to just automobiles. … So there’s an interest to determine whether we could define CO2 from automobiles as somehow different than CO2 from power plants, for example –
SEN. KLOBUCHAR: Do you think that’s possible?
BURNETT: Clearly it wasn’t supportable.
It is common knowledge that carbon dioxide is the same chemical regardless of what source emits it. But for the White House, which unabashedly asserts its anti-environment agenda, the definition of CO2 can change to help big polluters.
“I must say that it was sometimes somewhat embarrassing,” Burnett admitted, “for me to return to EPA and ask for my colleagues to explain yet again that CO2 is a molecule and there is no scientific way of differentiating between CO2 from car and a power plant.”
Then again, what else can you expect from people who indulge in echo chamber legalese gymnastics in order to justify uncivilized barbarism and savagery, or who "reason" that simply buying a piece of paper saying "diploma" equals the same as, you know, actually studying and developing expertise to earn a bona fides degree? Indeed (emphasis added):
Report: White House Adviser, NSA Employees Bought Phony College DegreesNow take the following for consideration (emphasis added):
A senior military adviser working at the White House and two National Security Agency employees with top-secret security clearances were discovered among a list of nearly 10,000 people who purchased phony college degrees from a Washington state diploma mill, according to documents obtained by the Spokesman Review newspaper.
“William R. Church, a senior military adviser working in the White House, and George Michael Navadel, a U.S. State Department computer systems negotiator, who paid $5,400 for a doctorate in network engineering,” the Spokesman Review reported.
Information on Church could not be found on the White House website. An Internet search about Church’s military career and background also failed to turn up relevant information. A White House spokesperson did not return calls for comment.
The newspaper reported that the Department of Justice refused to publicly release the list once it completed an investigation. The Spokesman Review independently obtained the list of 9,612 individuals, who collectively spent $7.3 million on bogus degrees from a Spokane diploma mill, and posted the information on the newspaper’s website.
“A preliminary analysis of the list by The Spokesman-Review shows 135 individuals with ties to the military, 39 with links to educational institutions and 17 employed by government agencies,” the newspaper reported. “Those numbers were derived from e-mail addresses that are part of the list obtained by the newspaper. However, the exact number of individuals with ties to the military, government and education is believed to be far greater because many of those buyers used their personal e-mail accounts.”
(...) Stone Age people did have an understanding of simple cause and effect: I drink water and my thirst goes away; you hit me and I hurt; I sleep and I awake rested; I eat this root and I become sick. They were skilled in the techniques of hunting and gathering. Beyond these immediate realities they invented explanations as to how the world worked. It was through stories that people thought they understood the world around them - stories that passed from generation to generation. People, it seems, wondered about the world around them, as bright children do today. Stone Age people let their imaginations run. Stone Age people did not believe in skepticism or suspended judgment. They had no idea of progression in discovery and knowledge. They did not believe in progress.This sounds disturbingly all too familiar with today's "modern world":
Their stories merely changed. Their stories were often fanciful and impulsive rather than systematic. Within a tribe might be variations on the same story. With free imagination as the source of the stories, across generations their stories were embellished and altered. Stone Age people told their stories without demand for consistency or empirical verification. The element of free imagination would make their stories appear to people of later ages as childlike, incomplete or absurd. But Stone Age people accepted the stories as true because these were the explanations of their mothers, fathers, grandparents and clan or tribal leaders.
Stone Age people believed that they were living at the center of the universe, that the earth was a disk extending not far beyond known neighbors, mountains, or shorelines. They believed that all movement was the product of will. They saw insects as moving by will. They saw the sun, moon and stars closer than they were and as moving by will. For Stone Age people, will was spirit, and they saw their world as filled with many spirits. Or, to use another word: gods. This was the original polytheism.
When a person saw his reflection in the water he believed he was seeing his spirit - the invisible made visible by the magic of the water. (In modern times, Stone Age people might believe that a photographer had captured something of their spirit and for this reason object to being photographed.)
Seeing the lifeless bodies of those who had died, people believed the spirit of that person had left their body and gone to an invisible world where the spirits of the dead dwelled. And they believed that invisible spirits hovered around them.
People saw spirits as able to penetrate human bodies through the skin, nostrils, mouth, ears or other openings. Dreams, not being willed, were seen as invasions by a spirit during one's sleep. Sickness was seen as an invasion by an evil spirit, and cures were sought in the form of having the invading spirit exorcised from oneself - a practice that survived into modern times.
People saw spirits as able to invade things as well as persons. If a rock happened to have a shape that reminded one of a dead uncle it might be because the spirit of the uncle had invaded and become a part of that rock. Spirits were imagined to have taken up residence in stone or wooden idols. Spirit, they believed, was invisible and in everything.
Not yet interested in strict categories, people did not think about the difference between what they saw as spirit and what was later to be called materiality. And not having defined the difference between spirit and materiality, they believed that if one ate a portion of the body of a strong beast, such as a bear, one might acquire the spirit of the bear, or, if one ate a portion of the body of a deceased king one might acquire the special qualities of that king. The flesh of timid animals might be avoided in fear of ingesting timidity.
And not having defined a difference between spirit and materiality, Stone Age people believed that in preserving a corpse they were helping to preserve the spirit of one who had died. And they believed that they could nourish the spirit of the corpse by putting gifts of food alongside it (...)
As much as we are fortunate to live in this modern era of ours, which is defined by the continuous technological and scientific advances that are meant to increase the chasm between us and our primitive, superstitious outlook of the world and the universe, the overwhelming prevalence of ignorance and irrationality in our supposedly civilized societies leaves us mired in tribalism, intellectual sloth and the constant search for instant gratification.Not quite convinced? Then try this on further for size while replacing "spirit" with "angel", "demon", "saint", "miracle", etc. (emphasis added):
Indeed, and more than ever, too many among us prefer to wallow in superstition and the super-natural in order to sustain a so-called spiritual need for guidance in life – the sustained prevalence of seers, astrologers, mediums, and other quacks, illustrates well this tragic state of affairs. The same goes with regards to the belief in ghosts, haunts and spirits. Ditto for pseudo-sciences (e.g. homeopathy, crystals, pyramids, chelation, etc.) and the quacks who keep making a fortune in selling their placebo-remedies which are supposed to be miraculous. And let us not forget about everything related to "new age" religions and religious fundamentalism (whether Christian, Muslim, or any other).
(...) Not knowing how the world worked, Stone Age people attributed everything to the magic of the spirits. Birds flying or hovering on an updraft of air without falling to the ground was magic. Lightning, thunder, rain, the tides, and procreation were magic. Fire was magic and it was spirit, for it moved itself, and, when water was thrown upon it, it uttered a cry like a slain animal.Once again: sounds eerily and disturbingly familiar, no?
Seeing everything in nature as spirit they respected it in its many forms. Also, they recognized their dependence on some of what the spirits had to offer. They feared the power of the spirits and deprivation. People saw spirits as having emotion. Lightning, thunder, strong winds high seas and floods were anger. People feared the anger of the spirits and hoped to placate them with kind words and gifts through a magic of their own.
How the world came into being was explained in stories about the doings of the spirits, a common story being of a male god of sky and the mother god that was earth giving birth to gods that were atmosphere and other phenomena. The imagination of those who created the stories was limited to the world that they could understand. They spoke of gods having created humanity out of earth, tree bark and other ingredients. A god was described as having created plants, beasts and humans, and a story described why the spirits were immortal and humans merely mortal.
They believed that their gods had made the world what it is and that their society and the world would always be as the gods had made it. They had no sense of social progress or image of humanity's capabilities. The imagination of those who had a biological potential for genius, and others of normal intelligence, was limited by their culture. Had it been otherwise, modern times would have come much sooner than it did.
Limited in their view of the breadth of the world, people believed the gods had made their surroundings especially for them. The gods were their gods, and seeing their most powerful god as having their interests at heart they tended to see this god as good. When something went wrong, as in failures at hunting or sickness and death, a society might engage in a ritual to make things good again by waking up the Great Spirit. In another society, calamity might be believed to be the product of people disobeying their gods.
Unrestrained in self-confidence, they believed that if the gods could perform magic so too could they. The earliest form of religious ritual was an attempt at magic through imitation - such as painting a face on the belly of a pregnant woman in hope that the magic of the drawing would encourage birth. There were also ritual fasts or trances that were believed to invoke magic, done in order to receive from the spirits the skills needed to be a good hunter or warrior.
Also common were rituals that we call funerals (...)
Hence, my previous conclusion that the fundamentalists, denialists, neocons and other assorted right-wing madhaters are the same ignorant, fearful and surperstitious primitives that our ancestors were, thousands upon thousands of years ago - except that they now use newspapers, magazines, television, radio, politics, and the internet, to spread their intellectual sloth-driven non-understanding of the world and, consequently, working hard at bringing us down to their level of ignorance.
That, coupled to their pathetic inhability to accept - or deal with - reality, along with their typical shameless hypocrisy in trying to justify any and all duplicity on their part in the face of whatever self-deluded moral ground du jour that they claim, make them not only nothing more than primitive minds, but utter incompetent modern human beings as well.
Q.E.D. - yet again.
In the meantime, perhaps it would be wise on the part of the rest of us to dwell seriously on how much overall "progress" exactly we have achieved with our "modern" religions and today's current "belief" systems ...
(Originally posted at APOV)
Monday
Confessions of a Renegade Christian
The Poetry Man has asked me to post something on Monday's. What follows is an article I am preparing for The Smirking Chimp. The next couple of Monday's will be iffy. On May 2, I am joining 214 other singers at Carnegie Hall for a performance of Verdi's Requiem. Life should return to normal after the 2nd. --cw
Two points must be understood before we begin. First, as the title states, I am a renegade Christian. Like Barak Obama and Bill Moyers, I belong to the United Church of Christ (UCC), a delightfully non-creedal church that is quite tolerant of my heresies.
The second point is that, with a few exceptions, Christianity and organized religion are as oil is to water. Historically, Christianity has so much blood on its hands, it is impossible to tell where the fingers ends and the nails begin. All of this violence surfaces as soon as the church gains political power. When Church and State wed, Hell pays for the reception because the child of the union is Death.
The truth is that organized religion chokes on the teachings of Jesus. Early Christians referred to their faith at The Way. For them, the essence of this faith was internalizing Jesus’ teachings and actually living them. The Way included little annoyances like loving your enemies and turning the other cheek. (The Religious Right would have us believe that what Jesus actually said was turn the other’s cheek, with a fistful of knuckles.)
Living the Beatitudes is a pain in the ass, so it is easier for organized religion to get its knickers in a knot over evolution, same-sex marriage and sex in general.
The separation of church and state was not the brainchild of eighteenth century secular humanists. It was the creation of a clergyman, Roger Smith. The Puritans booted Smith out of Massachusetts because of his heretical beliefs. Based on his experience there and in England, Smith came to realize that nothing corrupted a religion faster than being made a state religion. Constantine destroyed The Way when he made it Rome’s official religion. So, in Smith’s view, the separation of the two was necessary to keep religion healthy and uncorrupted by the quest for political power. (The corrupted faith of the religious right becomes understandable when we remember that from the 1820s to the 1960s, a White, male-dominated Protestantism was the de facto state religion of America, and they want it back!)
The Way, once it frees itself from the corrupting influence of the state, is grounded in one of the world’s most misunderstood concepts: Christian love.
At the mention of Christian love, many people envision a white-robed maiden skipping through La-La Land with a beatific smile on her face.
It is anything but!
Christian love demands a descent into the deepest pit of Hell and a willingness to love every low-life son of a bitch one finds there, even though one’s knee-jerk reaction is to tear their freaking throats out. In Greek, Christian love is called agape and is defined as an attitude and not an emotion.
I am always amused by the religious right’s efforts to place the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Progressives missed a golden opportunity when Judge Roy Moore wanted blocks of granite with the Commandments engraved on them placed in the country’s courthouses.
What Progressives should have done was help him move the damn blocks. And when they were in place, a good Progressive would have mopped his brow, stepped back and said, “Damn, judge. Have you read these things? They’re little more than anti-capitalist tripe. Look at what they are telling us: don’t kill; don’t steal: don’t lie; don’t exploit. How in the hell can you run a multinational with this albatross around your neck? The Bible even inveighs against a return of investment!”
Being a renegade Christian means living the Tao of Christ. For the renegade, dogma is an irritant that is either shaken off or ignored. It also means understanding that the Bible is a repository of spiritual, not literal truth. As one contemporary theologian put it, “Everything in the Bible is true; some of it actually happened.” Such an approach is difficult for Americans because most of us are raised to be technicians. (I define technician to include everyone from a neurosurgeon to the front-end specialist at your local Buick dealer.)
The mantras we are brought up with are:
· Say what you mean!
· Get to the point!
· Don’t beat around the bush!
One word, one meaning, that was the doctrine we absorbed. Consequently, we choke on metaphors. So, when confronted with the Bible, it is an either/or choice: either it is all literally true, or it is all hokum. For the technician who believes, the Bible is a technical manual, and like all such manuals, it must be followed to the letter.
To the renegade Christian, God is the ground of Being whose qualities we will never know. Metaphorically, we might speak of Her as a person, but we run into trouble when we literalize that metaphor. God is too busy creating to “bless” anything, especially America (though such a belief is helpful if there are some natives to be slaughtered).
And, no! I am not one of those Christians who believe God is going to bail us out of the mess we’ve created simply because She gave us dominion over nature. According to the Bible, humanity’s dominion was brief; it lasted until Eve went apple picking. If you read God’s curse on Adam and Eve (Genesis, 3:14-19), it is obvious that humanity is stripped of its dominion and becomes just another derivative species.
God only promised Noah no more floods because the flood punished the earth and the earth was innocent (Genesis, 8:21). She said nothing about protecting us from self annihilation. The next Messiah could very well be a cockroach.
Nor was dominion restored to humanity after the flood. All God said was, “The fear and dread of you shall rest on every animal of the earth…” (Genesis, 9:2).
Granted, God has entered into numerous covenants with humanity. But the covenants were only in force as long as humanity loved God, didn’t kill, didn’t steal, didn’t lie and didn’t exploit.
The life span of the average Covenant can be measured in nanoseconds.
We are knee deep in an era of bile. These days, Christian love is too often extruded on a spittle spray of rage. There is anger, uncertainty and hard times. And yes, there is a lot of bitterness, despite the facile boosterism of our leaders. These same leaders, aided and abetted by a compliant media, would have us project this anger on those with skins darker than ours, be they immigrants or terrorists.
For the past sixty-plus years, fear and paranoia have driven America’s policies, both foreign and domestic. According to our leaders and their media lapdogs, danger lurks everywhere: in the food we eat, the air we breathe and the second-hand smoke we inhale, not to mention a multitude of germs, bacteria and exotic diseases. America, they tell us, is constantly under siege, first by commies and now by Islamofascist terrorists.
The first order of business for Progressives must be to challenge this atmosphere of fear and trembling. Those of us who dissent from our national paranoia must find the spiritual strength to stand up and proclaim that there is nothing to fear. For myself, I draw my strength from The Tao of the Christ, and from the Liberation Theology of Latin America. This is not for everybody, nor should it be. But it could well be that at some future date; it will be missionaries from Latin America who will teach us how to live a life in harmony with creation.
Tragically, there is no guarantee we will listen.
Two points must be understood before we begin. First, as the title states, I am a renegade Christian. Like Barak Obama and Bill Moyers, I belong to the United Church of Christ (UCC), a delightfully non-creedal church that is quite tolerant of my heresies.
The second point is that, with a few exceptions, Christianity and organized religion are as oil is to water. Historically, Christianity has so much blood on its hands, it is impossible to tell where the fingers ends and the nails begin. All of this violence surfaces as soon as the church gains political power. When Church and State wed, Hell pays for the reception because the child of the union is Death.
The truth is that organized religion chokes on the teachings of Jesus. Early Christians referred to their faith at The Way. For them, the essence of this faith was internalizing Jesus’ teachings and actually living them. The Way included little annoyances like loving your enemies and turning the other cheek. (The Religious Right would have us believe that what Jesus actually said was turn the other’s cheek, with a fistful of knuckles.)
Living the Beatitudes is a pain in the ass, so it is easier for organized religion to get its knickers in a knot over evolution, same-sex marriage and sex in general.
The separation of church and state was not the brainchild of eighteenth century secular humanists. It was the creation of a clergyman, Roger Smith. The Puritans booted Smith out of Massachusetts because of his heretical beliefs. Based on his experience there and in England, Smith came to realize that nothing corrupted a religion faster than being made a state religion. Constantine destroyed The Way when he made it Rome’s official religion. So, in Smith’s view, the separation of the two was necessary to keep religion healthy and uncorrupted by the quest for political power. (The corrupted faith of the religious right becomes understandable when we remember that from the 1820s to the 1960s, a White, male-dominated Protestantism was the de facto state religion of America, and they want it back!)
The Way, once it frees itself from the corrupting influence of the state, is grounded in one of the world’s most misunderstood concepts: Christian love.
At the mention of Christian love, many people envision a white-robed maiden skipping through La-La Land with a beatific smile on her face.
It is anything but!
Christian love demands a descent into the deepest pit of Hell and a willingness to love every low-life son of a bitch one finds there, even though one’s knee-jerk reaction is to tear their freaking throats out. In Greek, Christian love is called agape and is defined as an attitude and not an emotion.
I am always amused by the religious right’s efforts to place the Ten Commandments in public buildings. Progressives missed a golden opportunity when Judge Roy Moore wanted blocks of granite with the Commandments engraved on them placed in the country’s courthouses.
What Progressives should have done was help him move the damn blocks. And when they were in place, a good Progressive would have mopped his brow, stepped back and said, “Damn, judge. Have you read these things? They’re little more than anti-capitalist tripe. Look at what they are telling us: don’t kill; don’t steal: don’t lie; don’t exploit. How in the hell can you run a multinational with this albatross around your neck? The Bible even inveighs against a return of investment!”
Being a renegade Christian means living the Tao of Christ. For the renegade, dogma is an irritant that is either shaken off or ignored. It also means understanding that the Bible is a repository of spiritual, not literal truth. As one contemporary theologian put it, “Everything in the Bible is true; some of it actually happened.” Such an approach is difficult for Americans because most of us are raised to be technicians. (I define technician to include everyone from a neurosurgeon to the front-end specialist at your local Buick dealer.)
The mantras we are brought up with are:
· Say what you mean!
· Get to the point!
· Don’t beat around the bush!
One word, one meaning, that was the doctrine we absorbed. Consequently, we choke on metaphors. So, when confronted with the Bible, it is an either/or choice: either it is all literally true, or it is all hokum. For the technician who believes, the Bible is a technical manual, and like all such manuals, it must be followed to the letter.
To the renegade Christian, God is the ground of Being whose qualities we will never know. Metaphorically, we might speak of Her as a person, but we run into trouble when we literalize that metaphor. God is too busy creating to “bless” anything, especially America (though such a belief is helpful if there are some natives to be slaughtered).
And, no! I am not one of those Christians who believe God is going to bail us out of the mess we’ve created simply because She gave us dominion over nature. According to the Bible, humanity’s dominion was brief; it lasted until Eve went apple picking. If you read God’s curse on Adam and Eve (Genesis, 3:14-19), it is obvious that humanity is stripped of its dominion and becomes just another derivative species.
God only promised Noah no more floods because the flood punished the earth and the earth was innocent (Genesis, 8:21). She said nothing about protecting us from self annihilation. The next Messiah could very well be a cockroach.
Nor was dominion restored to humanity after the flood. All God said was, “The fear and dread of you shall rest on every animal of the earth…” (Genesis, 9:2).
Granted, God has entered into numerous covenants with humanity. But the covenants were only in force as long as humanity loved God, didn’t kill, didn’t steal, didn’t lie and didn’t exploit.
The life span of the average Covenant can be measured in nanoseconds.
We are knee deep in an era of bile. These days, Christian love is too often extruded on a spittle spray of rage. There is anger, uncertainty and hard times. And yes, there is a lot of bitterness, despite the facile boosterism of our leaders. These same leaders, aided and abetted by a compliant media, would have us project this anger on those with skins darker than ours, be they immigrants or terrorists.
For the past sixty-plus years, fear and paranoia have driven America’s policies, both foreign and domestic. According to our leaders and their media lapdogs, danger lurks everywhere: in the food we eat, the air we breathe and the second-hand smoke we inhale, not to mention a multitude of germs, bacteria and exotic diseases. America, they tell us, is constantly under siege, first by commies and now by Islamofascist terrorists.
The first order of business for Progressives must be to challenge this atmosphere of fear and trembling. Those of us who dissent from our national paranoia must find the spiritual strength to stand up and proclaim that there is nothing to fear. For myself, I draw my strength from The Tao of the Christ, and from the Liberation Theology of Latin America. This is not for everybody, nor should it be. But it could well be that at some future date; it will be missionaries from Latin America who will teach us how to live a life in harmony with creation.
Tragically, there is no guarantee we will listen.
Saturday
Tuesday
Oil Junkies for Jesus vs the Oil Crisis
via The Existentialist Cowboy by Len Hart on Jul 24, 2007
US involvement in Iraq is complicated by weird theology. Fundamentalist Christians insist upon an unconditional pro-Israeli policy no matter what! Israel is God's chosen nation. To oppose Israel, they say, is to damn our nation to hell. Another complication is our nation's symbiotic relationship with oil producing "infidels". GOP faithful believe that middle east oil is somehow ours to plunder. Many openly boast of stealing Iraqi oil. I call these SUV lovers, Oil Junkies for Jesus. For them, waging war for oil is not a war crime, it's a crusade, it's not an atrocity its a commandment. SUV's are not abominable energy hogs, they are God's own chariot. While we fear the mother of all energy crunches, Hubbert's Peak, oil junkies for Jesus look forward to just flying away from it all.In 1956, geophysicist, M. King Hubbert, working at the Shell research lab in Houston, TX based, predicted that US oil production would peak in the early 1970s. Others predicted a peak occurring right about now. For his efforts, Hubbert was pilloried by oil experts and economists. Nevertheless, the 70's are remembered less for Disco Duck than for the long lines at service stations. The Arab Oil Embargo had driven home a point that the US had become an oil junkie nation. The US partnership with Arab oil producers was always a strange marriage of fundamentalist Christians from Texas and equally fundamentalist Muslims from the far flung deserts of the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia.
Amid long lines, hot tempers and high prices, the era of cheap energy was over by the end of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, the so-called Yom Kippur War. The situation is complicated by what is conveniently and politically called "world terrorism" and the suspicion that the Bush administration turned a blind eye to the flow of "petro-dollars" finding their way into Saudi coffers and eventually into the hands of terrorists and, perhaps, bin Laden.
In the early days of the Iraq war, the moral implications of this were easily assuaged: just stick a flaq on your SUV, wave a yellow ribbon from your truck!Americans are just barely aware that they pay about one-third the price Europeans pay for gasoline! But you have to credit the GOP with resourcefulness. The Bush administration managed to get a message to the faithful: war in Iraq will result in lower prices at the pump even as the official line denied that the US attack and invasion of Iraq had anything at all to do with oil. That is revisionist history, of course. The record of US Ambassador April Glaspie's interview with Saddam Hussein on the eve of his attack of Kuwait proves conclusively that Hussein's "problems" with the Bush family began when he tried to lower the price of oil.
Apparently the nation bought the GOP line. Alternative fuels, green energy and efficient cars were no longer "in". It was not always so. The famous Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston during the oil embargo was dominated by talk of Solar Energy, Offshore Thermal Energy Conversion, and Wind Energy. The brightest minds from MIT, Harvard, and Cambridge were there --modeling the economics of it all.
It's easy to find in the 1970's the growing antipathy between big oil and the Democratic party. President Carter got caught in the cross hairs as perhaps JFK had much earlier when he promised to put an end to a Texas oil industry sacred cow --the Oil Depletion Allowance. Carter's advisors favored lifting price caps but his political advisors nixed the idea. Clearly, American consumers were fed up with higher prices but absurdly long lines were the only alternative. Even now consumers may not have it both ways.
Energy Secretary James R. Schlesinger favored lifting Federal price caps and doing away with what he called the "government's Byzantine allocation system". His proposal, he said, would go a long way toward spurring conservation while allocating scarce fuel more efficiently. It would, he said, eliminate the long lines at the gas pump. It would mean the end of dirt cheap gasoline. When Carter over ruled Schlesinger the press reported that the President had refused to eliminate Federal Price Caps against the advice of his own energy secretary. [See: Merrill Sheils, "The Energy Plan," Newsweek, July 23, 1979] In Houston, MIT energy economist would tell us reporters: 'All in all, it was a very weak, pallid performance,' said MIT energy economist Morris Adelman. 'The failure to decontrol will cost us a good deal.'
The future may be seen in our own past. It is simplistic to say merely that all the world's oil supplies will simply run dry, though oil supplies are finite to be sure. It is, rather, a matter of economics. Pennsylvania, for example, was America's first oil producing state --but Pennsylvania hasn't figured prominently in the oil industry in over a century. Oil seemed limitless; after all, it took some 60 years to consume the first 10% --a curve that has continually gotten steeper. Later --the Spindletop gushers in Texas startled the world only to be exploited and abandoned in a period of some twenty years or less.
Then the pattern repeated itself in West Texas. On the ranches just outside of Odessa/Midland, there is evidence that the robber barons of big oil simply walked away, abandoning wells to despoil the environment when it became no longer economically viable to operate them.
It ceased to be easy. That may explain why George W. Bush had to settle for stealing an election. In its first stages, petroleum exploration is a straight-forward technical procedure and, indeed, it was so easy wildcatters used to call it "land speculation with cash flow". Just shoot a modern seismic "net" across a basin and let the soundings delineate the significant prospects. The largest oil and gas fields are also the biggest and easiest targets; it was so easy in its early days that even an idiot could have made money. The fact that George W. Bush's ventures went belly-up twice is significant. Every other idiot was making money.
Shrub failed to find oil amid plenty but he did find "the Lord" in a hell hole --Odessa/Midland. By that time, however, getting rich in oil had become more complicated. Simply, the cost of producing oil outstripped oil's value. What happened in Pennsylvania, Beaumont (Spindletop), Odessa/Midland will one day happen to Saudi Arabia, The Persian Gulf, and Russia. The Arabs --inventors of Algebra --know this even if the blythe SUV-driving American idiot does not.
The demand for oil will increase from about eighty million barrels per day to about 125 million barrels per day by 2030; in the meantime, OPEC oil production will level off in 2014, if not sooner. A steep decline will begin in 2016 from which oil production will never recover. A big crunch is very nearly here if the shortfall isn't made up.
In the meantime, Halliburton, Unocal, Chevron rush to enrich themselves with Republican assistance, even complicity. The War in Iraq is only part of the grand chessboard albeit a key one. Should Bush abandon Iraq, the American oil industry faces a crisis. It is a last desperate, ruthless grasp that has plunged the world into a "war on terror" and too many Americans have been asked to do for Halliburton --not America!
Who is the genius behind the preduction thatt bears his name? In 1969, Hubbert skipped Woodstock to do math. Hubbert suspected that a graph of world oil production would follow a standard statistical norm and his findings are not unlike those of Malthus who said essentially the same thing of arithmetic food production in populations which increase geometrically. Students of elementary statistics will know it as a "bell curve". Hubbert was not appreciated in 1969 --the dawning of the Age of Aquarius. Nonetheless, he plotted a graph which predicted a peak of oil production followed by a precipitous decline. The future is now:
Hubbert is now said by experts to have made the "...only truly valid scientific projection of future oil production." A report by the Novum Corporation bluntly states that Hubbert was correct when he forecast oil production peaking in 1969. Since that time, domestic oil production has declined to within 5% of Hubbert's 1956 predictions.
If that were not a reality check, there's more. The world oil map is not what it was in the 70's. Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf producers still make up a quarter of the world's oil supply to be sure but new supplies are now found in Russia where production fell by one-half after the break-up of the Soviet Union. But foreign supplies are likewise finite and cannot be depended upon to bail out the US --especially given the increasingly murky role of Saudi Arabia and volatile political situations throughout the middle east. The war on terrorism cannot be counted on to bring stability to the region or to oil prices.
Dick Cheney's Halliburton, Enron, Unocal, and Chevron, for example, have long proposed a "consortium" to build a pipeline across Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea --a pipeline supported by Pakistan yet opposed by the Taliban. Only the insentient would not wonder if Dick Cheney's "pipeline" figured prominently in BBC reports that the United States had promised Pakistan a "little war" with Afghanistan --a promise made months before the events of 9/11.
Some conclusions: America's addiction to oil is not just a matter of taste, lifestyle, or provincialism. It is a matter of national security. Alarms bells should have gone off when Bush promised to end world terrorism at a time when his own family is in business with the people who finance them --Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan, for example, got carpet bombed; Saudi Arabia had merely to endure some bad press. Is that because the Saudis are well-connected with Bush et al?
Until fuel cell cars are made, scooters, economy vehicles, and public transportation --already popular everywhere, it seems, but in America --will become necessary in the US. The alternative is walking. More generally, there are glimpses of the future to be seen in various out-of-the-way places across the U.S: little communities where residents live "harmoniously" with the earth in super-insulated, comfortable houses coated with hardened clay. They do organic farming and telecommute. Just a bunch of hippies, tree-huggers, and liberals no doubt --but tell me that when your heating bill outstrips the value of your phony manor house.
In the meantime, Hubbert's Peak is not a Soap Opera. It does, rather, explain why Bush and Dick Cheney (Halliburton) may have --as has been published and reported now in an increasing number of sources --threatened Afghanistan with "carpet bombs" before 9-11. It also explains Bush's one time love of Putin. Bush didn't see Putin's soul; he saw his oil! It also explains why the have since fallen out. The US was "negotiating" pipeline rights with the Taliban; dying for God and country is one thing --but for Halliburton? Additional resources
- From Le The Chez Vierotchka: a must see:
- A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash
- The Six-Day War, The 6-Day War, 1967
- Buzzflash: Republicans Have Ignored the Real Terrorists
- International Energy Outlook 2002 - Energy Plug - world energy consumption forecasts 1996
- Allen, Micah, Intergalactic Science Fiction, Global Oil Supply
- Ivanhoe,L. F., Future world oil supplies: There is a finite limit, Novum Corp., Ojai, California. Note: Hubbert's projections were made on the basis of statistical projections of past US onshore and offshore lower--48 states production without Alaska.
- Perry, George L., Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, Brookings Institution, The War on Terrorism, the World Oil Market and the US Economy
- Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage
- Beyond Oil: The view from Hubbert's Peak
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
In an article from The Nation, which I discovered at QuiverFull.com, I quote this passage about the Quiverfull movement:
They refuse any attempt to regulate pregnancy. Quiverfull began with the publication of Rick and Jan Hess's 1989 book, A Full Quiver: Family Planning and the Lordship of Christ, which argues that God, as the "Great Physician" and sole "Birth Controller," opens and closes the womb on a case-by-case basis. Women's attempts to control their own bodies--the Lord's temple--are a seizure of divine power.
Another Quiverfull warrior by the name of Mary Pride is quoted in The Nation article as writing: "My body is not my own." This rebuttal of the feminist health text Our Bodies, Ourselves is deliberate. Quiverfull women are more than mothers. They're domestic warriors in the battle against what they see as forty years of destruction wrought by women's liberation: contraception, women's careers, abortion, divorce, homosexuality and child abuse, in that order.
A evangelical pastor:
"Some people think that what I'm doing--having eleven children--is wrong. I don't really get into that much. The Bible says 'be fruitful and multiply.' That's my belief system. They don't believe in God, so they think we have to conserve what we have. But in my belief system, He's going to give us a new earth." Overpopulation isn't a problem in a universe where God promises a clean global slate."
It's doubtful they'll have the large-scale impact they think they may have. But joined with other fundamentalist Christian churches, these people are going to be a constant thorn in the side of those of us who are pro-choice and support marriage equality. Look at the extent to which the Mormon community has grown, flourished financially and taken up the battle against marriage equality in the state of California.