Saturday, April 07, 2007

Bunny Trail

As you might imagine, Easter in the Jablomi household is, if anything, a celebration of spring, an observation at least of renewal and life, if not an overt ritual of same. This time around, The Sopranos inaugurates its homestretch run on Easter, so the missus is whipping up her world-famous lasagna, with a couple bottles of Two-Buck Chuck chilling in anticipation. Oh yeah, we roll deep around here come springtime.

And of course we're aware of how most of the world's Christian denominations choose to commemorate the day. I couldn't be more disinterested, and I mean that in the best way possible, honestly. Whatever works.

So it's a bit odd to read E.J. Dionne's earnest missive, countering the throngs of strident atheists who are apparently thwarting their seasonal efforts. Really, I had no idea. All I did this morning was some yardwork, and checked out my next run of classes. I hadn't gotten the message to meet down at St. Dominic's in the morning to cock-block parishioners heading to Mass.

While some Christians harbor doubts about Christ's actual physical resurrection, hundreds of millions believe devoutly that Jesus died and rose, thus redeeming a fallen world from sin.

Are these people a threat to reason and even freedom?


Short answer: no, so long as they can keep their spirituality reasonably apolitical. I know of no atheist or agnostic that cares one way or the other about individual spiritual beliefs; the problem always arises when someone gets the bright idea to take organized money and power and start making policy from it.

The problem with the neo-atheists is that they seem as dogmatic as the dogmatists they condemn. They are especially frustrated with religious "moderates" who don't fit their stereotypes.

In his bracing polemic " The End of Faith," Harris is candid in asserting that "religious moderates are themselves the bearers of a terrible dogma: they imagine that the path to peace will be paved once each one of us has learned to respect the unjustified beliefs of others."

Harris goes on: "I hope to show that the very ideal of religious tolerance -- born of the notion that every human being should be free to believe whatever he wants about God -- is one of the principal forces driving us toward the abyss. We have been slow to recognize the degree to which religious faith perpetuates man's inhumanity to man."


In the larger sense, polemic or not, Harris' assertion rings true. Name a current conflict or hot spot not informed by religious dogmatism and intolerance. I can think of only one -- North Korea, and even that country is only nominally atheist. The country is a textbook cult writ large; it's just that their god is a pompadoured dwarf with aviator shades. Atheism is not an organizing principle per se for them, because atheism is almost by definition disorganized to begin with. No, it's Sunni-Shi'a, Catholic-Protestant, Muslim-Jew, Hindu-Muslim, Muslim-Christian, etc. That's where the shit is being stirred.

But to be fair, it is not religious faith which perpetuates this, but religious certitude, the special kind of insanity that allows a man to kill another man over interpretations of books, sometimes even the same book. One figures that the truth is more plain than that -- that faith is merely used to justify and legitimize violence, whether proactively or retroactively. Cultural and tribal differences gets used in the same manner. And Harris, a PhD in neuroscience, tries to approach his thesis from a scientific perspective, rather than a dogmatic "we must do this to counter that" approach, which seems sensible. Indeed, he comes off pretty well in his debate with Rick Warren, where Warren sounds more like a guy who, when you get right down to it, is merely hedging his bets.

We're both betting. [Harris is] betting his life that he's right. I'm betting my life that Jesus was not a liar. When we die, if he's right, I've lost nothing. If I'm right, he's lost everything. I'm not willing to make that gamble.


These are very silly assertions, obviously, and not worthy of a truly serious, contemplative discussion. The idea that one retreats from rationally-based empiricism into a system of teleological reassurance is ultimately an intellectually static premise. This is why political Christianity has gained so much traction; since its intellectual stature is one of inertia and clutter, its driving forces go to the path of least resistance, the arena that welcomes its money and voting blocs.

Which is fine to a certain extent; believers and non-believers alike deserve to have their voices heard in the process. But they should not manifest themselves in inherently silly, needlessly provocative causes. I believe the Pledge of Allegiance should be returned to its original text at some point; I don't believe that going to the Supreme Court over it has any practical merit. I believe that Catholic dioceses should not be able to buy their way out of long-term criminal conspiracies to molest children and protect the molesters. I believe that as long as they are tolerant of other faiths desiring public representation, towns ought to be able to have nativity scenes without people bitching about it. I believe that intelligent design is a political hoax perpetrated by intellectual carnies, a needless waste of taxpayers' money and time. I believe that people of faith would be spending their time more intelligently by incorporating elements and developments of science and history, instead of ignoring or running from them.

Contrary to popular belief, atheists do believe in things, they just don't believe in autocratically imposing those beliefs just because they have a book that nobody is allowed to argue with.

2 comments:

  1. Pledge of Allegiance pictures http://rexcurry.net/pledge-allegiance-pledge-allegiance.jpg and Swastikas pictures http://rexcurry.net/swastika3clear.jpg expose shocking secrets about American history.

    Socialists in the USA originated the Nazi salute, robotic group-chanting to flags, Nazism, flag fetishism, and the modern swastika as "S" symbolism for "Socialism." http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html

    Much of that history is the history of the Pledge Of Allegiance. http://rexcurry.net/pledge-allegiance-pledge-allegiance.jpg Pledge Of Allegiance photographs expose America’s terrifying past.

    Those historical facts explain the enormous size and scope of government today, and the USA's growing police state. They are reasons for massive reductions in government, taxation, spending and socialism.

    The "Nazi salute" is more accurately called the "American salute" as it was created and popularized by national socialists in the USA. It was the early salute of the Pledge of Allegiance. The Pledge was written by Francis Bellamy. http://rexcurry.net/pledgetragedy.html Francis Bellamy was cousin and cohort of Edward Bellamy. http://rexcurry.net/pledgebackward.html Edward Bellamy and Francis Bellamy were self-proclaimed socialists in the Nationalism movement and they promoted military socialism.

    They wanted the government to take over education and use it to spread their worship of government. When the government granted their wish, the government’s schools imposed segregation by law and taught racism as official policy. The official racism and segregation was a bad example three decades before the National Socialist German Workers Party, and decades afterward.

    The Pledge was mandated by law in government schools for three decades before, and through, the creation of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. http://rexcurry.net/bellamy-edward-karl-marx.html

    see photo of Pledge of Allegiance http://rexcurry.net/USA-pledge-of-allegiance-rexcurrydotnet.jpg Pledge of Allegiance.

    Many people do not know that the term "Nazi" means "National Socialist German Workers' Party." Members of the horrid group did not call themselves Nazis. In that sense, there was no Nazi Party. They also did not call themselves Fascists. They called themselves socialists, just as their name indicates.

    The historian Dr. Rex Curry showed that the early Pledge Of Allegiance did not use an ancient Roman salute, and that the 'ancient Roman salute' myth came from the Pledge Of Allegiance. The discoveries have been reviewed and verified on wikipedia http://rexcurry.net/roman-salute-metropolitan-museum-of-art.html

    The original pledge was anti libertarian and began with a military salute that then stretched out toward the flag. In actual use, the second part of the gesture was performed with a straight arm and palm down by children casually performing the forced ritual chanting. Due to the way that both gestures were used sequentially in the pledge, the military salute led to the Nazi salute. The Nazi salute is an extended military salute via the USA's Pledge Of Allegiance.

    Media coverage about the discoveries continues to grow http://rexcurry.net/audio-rex-curry-podcast-radio.html

    Fan mail for work exposing the Pledge’s poisonous pedigree is at http://rexcurry.net/pledge_heart.html

    And listen at http://odeo.com/audio/1747108/view

    The Pledge's early salute caused quite a Fuhrer/furor. The dogma behind the Pledge was the same dogma that led to the socialist Wholecost (of which the Holocaust was a part): 62 million slaughtered under the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; 49 million under the Peoples’ Republic of China; 21 million under the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. It was the worst slaughter of humanity ever.

    People were persecuted (beatings, lynchings, etc) for refusing to perform robotic chanting to the national flag at the same time in government schools in the USA and Germany (to the American flag, and to the German swastika flag).

    American socialists (Edward Bellamy teamed with the Theosophical Society) also bear some blame for the modern swastika http://rexcurry.net/swastika3clear.jpg Swastikas became overlapping S-letters for "socialism," all shown in the research of the noted symbologist Dr. Rex Curry. Although the swastika was an ancient symbol, its use was altered to alphabetic symbolism in modern times. http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-swastika.html As German socialism's notorious flag symbol, the swastika was deliberately turned 45 degrees to the horizontal and always oriented in the S-direction. Similar alphabetic symbolism is still visible as Volkswagen logos. http://rexcurry.net/swastika-audi-logo.JPG

    The bizarre acts in the USA began as early as 1875 and continued through the creation of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (German Nazis or NSGWP). American soldiers used the swastika symbol in WWI (against Germany) and the symbol was used by the American military during WWII. http://rexcurry.net/45th-infantry-division-swastika-sooner-soldiers.html

    The NSGWP had clear roots in National Socialism promoted by socialists in the USA. Amazing graphic images that prove the point are at http://rexcurry.net/theosophy-madame-blavatsky-theosophical-society.html

    The USA is still the worst example in the world of bizarre laws that require robotic chanting to a national flag in government schools (socialist schools) every day for 12 years. It has changed generations of Americans from libertarians to authoritarians. The government bamboozled individuals into believing that collective robotic chanting in government schools daily is a beautiful expression of freedom. http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-pledge.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. I saw that Warren quote excerpted somewhere else. Pascal's Wager, Rick? Really? What a fucking joke. Sitting in on a Philosophy 101 class would probably give him a chance to hear a bright student explain all that's wrong with that stupid idea.

    And I really don't even feel like reading Dionne's bullshit today. That tired old attempt to pit the "dogmatists of both sides" against each other while the sensible types like E.J. sit elevated in between them in the lotus position, looking down their nose at anyone who actually means what they say enough to ruffle feathers arguing about it, is even more irritating than reheated Pascal leftovers.

    I'll give the fundies credit for that, at least - they logically enough feel that a belief like theirs is worth making noise about*, while shitheads like Dionne apparently think the height of enlightenment is to be equally jaded and noncommittal about everything. Just soooo above it all, dude.

    *Although, really - I think it's obvious enough that no one actually believes in the existence of heaven or hell no matter how much verbal wind they break over it. Do they really act like it?

    Imagine you were living in Germany in the 30s, and you somehow saw a loved one's name on a list of people to be rounded up by the Gestapo the next morning. You haul ass over to them to warn them and help them escape, but they laugh you off and deny there's anything to fear, that stuff about concentration camps is all a myth, etc. Would you just shrug your shoulders and walk away, saying "Oh, well, guess you'll learn soon enough?" Of course not - you'd clock them over the noggin and drag them away unconscious if that's what it took, trusting that they would appreciate it later.

    But in the case of hell, which is clearly a million times worse than any Nazi camp, from what I hear, we're supposed to believe that a believer can be so nonchalant about the idea of friends and family being tortured for eternity? Or that they can so easily let us miss the chance to spend eternity in bliss? Bullshit. Deep down, I think, it's clear that some part of the mind can't be bamboozled by abstract fantasies no matter how much they try to deny it. Their lack of proportional passion for this idea that should matter more than anything else put together is evidence to me that they don't even truly believe their own stories.

    So yes, E.J., this kind of thing is a threat to reason, fuck you very much.

    ReplyDelete