I saw on reddit that Christians wonder why Atheists feel they have to put Christians down, indeed atheists wonder why Christians put Atheists down. It's probably the same thing, like each community has it's own team, whatever the topic. My own experience is that Christians are mostly ok & only those who try to talk about faith (or lack if it) require repression. The missionary spirit is obnoxious, unacceptably conceited, overbearing, inconsiderate, impolite, condescending, oppressive, insulting, and very very ignorant. When it talks about faith and belief in the bible as the word of god, faith is not reasonable (this is bad). Reason connects prior experiences between people, faith doesn't and blithely offers no substitute. It is it's own answer, you have to have it before you understand. Having faith is like being trained in martial arts. Nobody can possibly touch you, every opposing posture has a counter position. If you die, it's a noble death. You're innocent as George Bush because the most obvious and egregious lie in the name of faith is unquestionable.
Why not faith in astrology? I can see small groups of smiling clean cut astrology missionaries going door to door, handing out glossy pamphlets showing the possible end of the world if funding isn't found to study the orbits of near earth asteroids. Dudes, here's my free astrology software.
More than any other world view or philosophy, faith requires trusting someone else's experience over your own. I have a problem with any blank check on my credibility. Human awareness is built on a learned description, which limits what we allow ourselves to know, to mainly things which we can communicate. The sources of these things (authority figures and social conventions), require trusting someone else's experience over our own. Though that process is the backbone of primate society, those sources may still be in error. Unfortunately, the error is too often intentional.
Some studies with monkeys showed that when one masters a game played with other monkeys, to win food, the master must allow the other to win 40% of the time, or the others won't play and nobody gets food. The odds there were 6 to 4 for being conned based on trust. Humans are at least more trusting (6.5 to 3.5), if not smarter, as shown by Experiments in social conformity & torture (BBC). Also see: Placebos, belief and trust (eurekalert.org). These odds for being conned don't differentiate players who know they're being conned, but go along because it's better than to challenge authority and risk receiving some kind of reprimand.
Even so, I think the church (all of them) has done a pretty good job of making people happy and dumb. Things could be worse (1) than structured forgiveness, and having a large percent of social misfits held in check by benign neglect because they're socially accepted. However you cut it though, some percent of people will game the system opportunistically. The worst of these either feel socially alienated or are psychopathic. I'd imagine that if the cause was alienation, it would be a mistake to punish them by alienating them further.
Mark Twain on "The Fall of Man" w/ links to other good stories)
_____________
(1) Worse: the American prison system, the alternate patron of misfits (2), offers no absolution or social acceptance at all, teaches that inmates are inhuman, and offers rape, a broken spirit, eternal damnation and hell. Misfits find their only society to be other misfits and so form a default team, exchanging ideas and methodologies, until a pool of the dammed becomes available for antisocial efforts (like Blackwater, Mexican drug cartels, or The Joker). When this group reaches critical mass, a war against them becomes politically justifiable.
(2) the term "misfits" is used broadly here to include the nonviolent and offenders of statistics.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
It's the writers opinion that we owe our existence to god thusly:
Without the ingratiating influence of religious manipulators, we'd all be murdering yetis, and our civilization could have never evolved.
Of course, we're not done yet, and the most probable scenario for global nuclear war seems to be about religion.
However the most powerful decision makers don't necessarily benefit from organized religion. When their sweating finger lays possessively on THE BUTTON, and the demons of indecision flap about, who ya gonna call? In fact the one man I would give kudos to without reservation is the Soviet Submarine officer who chose not to start WW3 over the Cuban missiles while everyone else was hooting and beating their chest. He walked (sailed) away, and as we all know, commies are atheists. And we're still here. The next day politicians in the Kremlin and Washington, were washing out their pants, thanking god that someone had the brains to stop.
Well ok, that example couldn't possibly represent every world shaking decision supported by faith in god, or lack of it. But I'd feel secure in betting any amount of cash, that more wars have been waged in gods name than in the name of atheism. It's true that Joe Stalin and chairman Mao killed more than 50 million of their own people, but they were fighting with religious believers. Marxism & Communism have only been around about 100 years, but some version of god has been w/ us for 10 thousand +. Politicians need to generate enthusiasm & hormones to accomplish what truth and reason would show to be the benefit of a tiny minority.
God will always be a tool of the state because it (He) represents the ultimate in plausible deniability. Actually the state is a natural result of a religious elite (like the priority of chicken or egg, they're hard to separate). As a unique species of genocidal ape, we really do need something to balance our tendency to mass psychopathy, with something less murderous. A "moral religion" works, w/ self denial, monasteries, places of commitment, houses of worship, a social order greater than the individual, & warrior monks (aka drones). So someone takes on a role as a seer or healer or confessor, gets backers & starts negotiating political deals. Making people feel good about it is THE required skill, anyone physically big enough can intimidate people to get Poon. but playing the good guy too, wins committed allies, then we can all get poon even though we're short & scrawny.
God favors them wot favors themselves:
the problem w/ peace on earth is bullies. see we have "The Peace Makers" (aka plebeian hippy fags) in one corner, and we have "The Entitled" (aka "The Righteous") in the other corner. The Peace Makers must somehow represent their ideal, so they reject aggression. This makes them defenseless, sullen, passive-aggressive emo-Goths. The Entitled must live to a code which challenges the non-entitled (this is why have-nots don't have), and allows The Righteous claim to anything they want because god is on their side. Anyone who can't or won't defend themselves is suicidal & therefore destined for hell anyway, so screw the punk ass hippy peacemaker. Yes, well this evidence indicates that hippy fagism may one day save everyone's butt from tumescent, self serving religious bureaucracies, oddly in the same way that Judaism validated it's self to Rome. Thusly:
Rome was tolerant of "all" religions, but a real religion had to show some divine connection to qualify. Some carpenter claiming to be the son of god sounded lame even then, but fulfillment of prophecies were a good way to show gods favor. So the Pharisees spoke craftily among themselves saying "Lo, we can turn this nut to our benefit. if we denounce him now, he'll fulfill the prophecy of the Messiah dying on the tree". The tree symbolism is a reference to ol' timey hebrew procedure dealing w/ uppity political figures and screwballs, by tieing them up in a tree till they agreed to recognize the existing social order (cheaper than jails & more practical if y'all live in tents). If the screwball stubbornly expired before he acquiesced, then he retroactively got gods blessing in order to appease his family, or clan, who might have hairy backs, and number several hundred. So that's what they did & said to Rome "hey lookit what you did" & naturally Rome couldn't deny it's own divinity, so Judaism became a recognized religion because Roman law fulfilled the prophesy. though it still took awhile to iron out the details because they were, as now, somewhat pig headed.
So, Buddha & Jesus theory used sort of the same plan to organize peacemakers: they set up a code of inclusion so that some demographic of The Righteous would already be on their side. It turns out that's like herding cats, which is said to be impossible (beats tetris), unless there's also something that attracts cats to make them clump together. One of the "somethings" is the "honor" of defending peace through violence rather than Hippy Fagism, so we're right back where we started, only now "We have met the enemy, and he is us" (P. Possum, 1970).
How warfare shaped human evolution (newscientist)
sex and war
So ok lets get practical, the traditional social model doesn't allow peaceful resolution when things get dire because hormones trump communication & reason. There are however thousands of Emos (not the bird) who would pay good money (that means probably not in American dollars) to get into a sexual relationship w/ "the enemy" for altruistic reasons. Japan recognized this potential at the end of WW2. Expecting victorious Americans to overrun the country, raping & pillaging, they offered a front line of "Geishas" to take the hormonal edge off the first wave, and offer an alternate dynamic. It was a noble gesture and it may have saved the country, but like most alternate dynamics, we'll never know. I understand Japan now owns most of the automobile market as well as the financial debt for Bush & Cheney's war, so retrospectively it may have been a working strategy (for the sake of Americas national pride). Actually, I don't expect the religious right, or anyone else, to get behind this (historical precedent is against me), but it's a seldom considered alternative: Take a Bonobo to lunch, and Make Love Not War, but don't expect respect unless you're dominant (and you're not).
But if you are, this is the most terrifying picture I've ever seen. Readers with a tenuous grip on moral ethics definitely should not
(no, god! don't do it ) --> ! CLICK HERE ! <--
fag comix (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 1 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 2 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 3 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 4 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 5 (sinfest)
epidemics of fear (sciencedaily)
cars have personality (faces) (eurekalert)
Atheist may sue if law on Las Vegas officiants won't change (latimes)
Without the ingratiating influence of religious manipulators, we'd all be murdering yetis, and our civilization could have never evolved.
Of course, we're not done yet, and the most probable scenario for global nuclear war seems to be about religion.
However the most powerful decision makers don't necessarily benefit from organized religion. When their sweating finger lays possessively on THE BUTTON, and the demons of indecision flap about, who ya gonna call? In fact the one man I would give kudos to without reservation is the Soviet Submarine officer who chose not to start WW3 over the Cuban missiles while everyone else was hooting and beating their chest. He walked (sailed) away, and as we all know, commies are atheists. And we're still here. The next day politicians in the Kremlin and Washington, were washing out their pants, thanking god that someone had the brains to stop.
Well ok, that example couldn't possibly represent every world shaking decision supported by faith in god, or lack of it. But I'd feel secure in betting any amount of cash, that more wars have been waged in gods name than in the name of atheism. It's true that Joe Stalin and chairman Mao killed more than 50 million of their own people, but they were fighting with religious believers. Marxism & Communism have only been around about 100 years, but some version of god has been w/ us for 10 thousand +. Politicians need to generate enthusiasm & hormones to accomplish what truth and reason would show to be the benefit of a tiny minority.
God will always be a tool of the state because it (He) represents the ultimate in plausible deniability. Actually the state is a natural result of a religious elite (like the priority of chicken or egg, they're hard to separate). As a unique species of genocidal ape, we really do need something to balance our tendency to mass psychopathy, with something less murderous. A "moral religion" works, w/ self denial, monasteries, places of commitment, houses of worship, a social order greater than the individual, & warrior monks (aka drones). So someone takes on a role as a seer or healer or confessor, gets backers & starts negotiating political deals. Making people feel good about it is THE required skill, anyone physically big enough can intimidate people to get Poon. but playing the good guy too, wins committed allies, then we can all get poon even though we're short & scrawny.
God favors them wot favors themselves:
the problem w/ peace on earth is bullies. see we have "The Peace Makers" (aka plebeian hippy fags) in one corner, and we have "The Entitled" (aka "The Righteous") in the other corner. The Peace Makers must somehow represent their ideal, so they reject aggression. This makes them defenseless, sullen, passive-aggressive emo-Goths. The Entitled must live to a code which challenges the non-entitled (this is why have-nots don't have), and allows The Righteous claim to anything they want because god is on their side. Anyone who can't or won't defend themselves is suicidal & therefore destined for hell anyway, so screw the punk ass hippy peacemaker. Yes, well this evidence indicates that hippy fagism may one day save everyone's butt from tumescent, self serving religious bureaucracies, oddly in the same way that Judaism validated it's self to Rome. Thusly:
Rome was tolerant of "all" religions, but a real religion had to show some divine connection to qualify. Some carpenter claiming to be the son of god sounded lame even then, but fulfillment of prophecies were a good way to show gods favor. So the Pharisees spoke craftily among themselves saying "Lo, we can turn this nut to our benefit. if we denounce him now, he'll fulfill the prophecy of the Messiah dying on the tree". The tree symbolism is a reference to ol' timey hebrew procedure dealing w/ uppity political figures and screwballs, by tieing them up in a tree till they agreed to recognize the existing social order (cheaper than jails & more practical if y'all live in tents). If the screwball stubbornly expired before he acquiesced, then he retroactively got gods blessing in order to appease his family, or clan, who might have hairy backs, and number several hundred. So that's what they did & said to Rome "hey lookit what you did" & naturally Rome couldn't deny it's own divinity, so Judaism became a recognized religion because Roman law fulfilled the prophesy. though it still took awhile to iron out the details because they were, as now, somewhat pig headed.
So, Buddha & Jesus theory used sort of the same plan to organize peacemakers: they set up a code of inclusion so that some demographic of The Righteous would already be on their side. It turns out that's like herding cats, which is said to be impossible (beats tetris), unless there's also something that attracts cats to make them clump together. One of the "somethings" is the "honor" of defending peace through violence rather than Hippy Fagism, so we're right back where we started, only now "We have met the enemy, and he is us" (P. Possum, 1970).
How warfare shaped human evolution (newscientist)
sex and war
So ok lets get practical, the traditional social model doesn't allow peaceful resolution when things get dire because hormones trump communication & reason. There are however thousands of Emos (not the bird) who would pay good money (that means probably not in American dollars) to get into a sexual relationship w/ "the enemy" for altruistic reasons. Japan recognized this potential at the end of WW2. Expecting victorious Americans to overrun the country, raping & pillaging, they offered a front line of "Geishas" to take the hormonal edge off the first wave, and offer an alternate dynamic. It was a noble gesture and it may have saved the country, but like most alternate dynamics, we'll never know. I understand Japan now owns most of the automobile market as well as the financial debt for Bush & Cheney's war, so retrospectively it may have been a working strategy (for the sake of Americas national pride). Actually, I don't expect the religious right, or anyone else, to get behind this (historical precedent is against me), but it's a seldom considered alternative: Take a Bonobo to lunch, and Make Love Not War, but don't expect respect unless you're dominant (and you're not).
But if you are, this is the most terrifying picture I've ever seen. Readers with a tenuous grip on moral ethics definitely should not
(no, god! don't do it ) --> ! CLICK HERE ! <--
fag comix (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 1 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 2 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 3 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 4 (sinfest)
voodoo dance of opposites 5 (sinfest)
epidemics of fear (sciencedaily)
cars have personality (faces) (eurekalert)
Atheist may sue if law on Las Vegas officiants won't change (latimes)
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Everything we conceptualize is in relation to other people. so we're at odds w/ parts of the world that don't show things we can either represent to or as people. there's just no way to grasp it. justify anything: it comes down to it's social value.
Krill for example: obscure little shrimp like bug thingies that live in the open ocean and form the major part of baleen whale diets. Their value as individuals is unthinkable, we don't have anything in common. they're lousy conversationalists. our interest in them is mainly: how might we exploit them to make a point of conjecture, or rip off their protein.
so what do krill do when they're bored? like us, it's sex & food. they aren't too concerned w/ housing because they're free swimming, although they do migrate between temperature clines to follow plankton (which they eat). Like us, they swarm in colonies for protection, but they have no word for "landlord".
The Lords of Creation were sitting around discussing how cool it was to be a Lord, when some fool asked "hey, what's a lord anyhow" Lords Shango and Loki laughed mightily (as lords are wont to do), and incinerated him on the spot. "That's a Lord, fool" There was no reply. Then Jesus, who was the Lord of Lords said "So like, what's next, dudes? We really needed that guy so we can be lords"
see, EVERYTHING describable must have a social value or it's meaningless & just not interesting. Abstractions become anthropomorphic with social labels. Straight lines grow eyes and feet.
Atheist Toast
why people believe in supernatural stuff
Anthropologist Develops New Approach to Explain Religious Behavior
How an Amazonian tribe turned a missionary into an Atheist(freethinker.co.uk)
Application for godship
Why bad things happen
another deadbeat god
Krill for example: obscure little shrimp like bug thingies that live in the open ocean and form the major part of baleen whale diets. Their value as individuals is unthinkable, we don't have anything in common. they're lousy conversationalists. our interest in them is mainly: how might we exploit them to make a point of conjecture, or rip off their protein.
so what do krill do when they're bored? like us, it's sex & food. they aren't too concerned w/ housing because they're free swimming, although they do migrate between temperature clines to follow plankton (which they eat). Like us, they swarm in colonies for protection, but they have no word for "landlord".
The Lords of Creation were sitting around discussing how cool it was to be a Lord, when some fool asked "hey, what's a lord anyhow" Lords Shango and Loki laughed mightily (as lords are wont to do), and incinerated him on the spot. "That's a Lord, fool" There was no reply. Then Jesus, who was the Lord of Lords said "So like, what's next, dudes? We really needed that guy so we can be lords"
see, EVERYTHING describable must have a social value or it's meaningless & just not interesting. Abstractions become anthropomorphic with social labels. Straight lines grow eyes and feet.
Atheist Toast
why people believe in supernatural stuff
Anthropologist Develops New Approach to Explain Religious Behavior
How an Amazonian tribe turned a missionary into an Atheist(freethinker.co.uk)
Application for godship
Why bad things happen
another deadbeat god
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Here's 2 dozen versions of the bible and comments. I admire this guy because he allows comments. I don't allow them because bible thumpers (to me) are irrational and it depresses me that the god of natural selection hasn't struck them all dead. So ok, you exist, you win, evolution works.
Dated and droll as it may be, the carnage, treachery, incest and obscenity in the Bible only represents the real world. Most, if not all, of it's authors are talking about how to deal with disillusionment without running away or taking a shotgun down to the local Mac Donalds to even the score. Unfortunately something gets lost in the translation. Fortunately, it gets us by because we can always surmise the intent of the teaching, based on the desires of our social superiors (like pop culture gods). Unfortunately, that doesn't actually resolve the problem, it only makes us appear to be as normal as our social superiors (like MIchael Jackson, Brittney, Adolph HItler, Jim Jones, OJ Simpson, or George Bush ll). Like, here's an article on normal sexual aberration in animals, unfortunately (or not), they're not aberrations, fortunately (or not) they have almost nothing to do with the church.
Whether you think (like me) that heaven is in your head, or someplace physical like Jones Town, the recognizable property of heaven is that things are good there. It's a model of goodness that people keep trying to build up around us. Some models are a fortress, some are open. In theory it doesn't matter if it's closed or open, but in practicality, it does. A closed heaven in your head, isn't heaven. An open heaven in Guyana, invites malaria & probably criticism from neighboring (richer, and more heavenly) heavens.
heaven is an amusement park that never closes
Though everyone agrees that heaven is the ideal model (even satanists, for them hell is heaven), we still can't reach agreement on phrases like "heavenly music" or "heaven on earth". Governmental ambassadors, judicial intermediaries, hand shakes, gift exchanges, marriages, & all kinds of formal acknowledgments still don't do the trick because we're separated from the world by respect.
not that we shouldn't respect the world (god knows we don't anyhow), rather, we should be the world, the world is us. Live the dream.
A god driven universe is, is frankly absurd, it has the same deductive rationale as geocentrism & a flat earth. more so if the universe is the product of a god made by man. Evidence for this is in the righteousness of any religion, they can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.
Dated and droll as it may be, the carnage, treachery, incest and obscenity in the Bible only represents the real world. Most, if not all, of it's authors are talking about how to deal with disillusionment without running away or taking a shotgun down to the local Mac Donalds to even the score. Unfortunately something gets lost in the translation. Fortunately, it gets us by because we can always surmise the intent of the teaching, based on the desires of our social superiors (like pop culture gods). Unfortunately, that doesn't actually resolve the problem, it only makes us appear to be as normal as our social superiors (like MIchael Jackson, Brittney, Adolph HItler, Jim Jones, OJ Simpson, or George Bush ll). Like, here's an article on normal sexual aberration in animals, unfortunately (or not), they're not aberrations, fortunately (or not) they have almost nothing to do with the church.
Whether you think (like me) that heaven is in your head, or someplace physical like Jones Town, the recognizable property of heaven is that things are good there. It's a model of goodness that people keep trying to build up around us. Some models are a fortress, some are open. In theory it doesn't matter if it's closed or open, but in practicality, it does. A closed heaven in your head, isn't heaven. An open heaven in Guyana, invites malaria & probably criticism from neighboring (richer, and more heavenly) heavens.
heaven is an amusement park that never closes
Though everyone agrees that heaven is the ideal model (even satanists, for them hell is heaven), we still can't reach agreement on phrases like "heavenly music" or "heaven on earth". Governmental ambassadors, judicial intermediaries, hand shakes, gift exchanges, marriages, & all kinds of formal acknowledgments still don't do the trick because we're separated from the world by respect.
not that we shouldn't respect the world (god knows we don't anyhow), rather, we should be the world, the world is us. Live the dream.A god driven universe is, is frankly absurd, it has the same deductive rationale as geocentrism & a flat earth. more so if the universe is the product of a god made by man. Evidence for this is in the righteousness of any religion, they can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
This is just a guess: If I were god (which of course I am), I'd develop an alter ego so there'd be some kind of feedback. Then I'd get into heated debates about irrelevant crap, based on whomever had the idea first & is thus the original. Then I'd jump on the bastard & beat the shit out of him for being so disrespectful, and place him in some kind of parallel continuum like heaven, or hell where he would be handy to validate my existence, but be unable to bug me otherwise. The deal being: as soon as I'm through with existence, you can have it, (smirk smirk) so he never gets it. (giggle)
Like I was talking to God the other day & he said "Alas my creations are unbearably stupid. It reflects on me, not because they fight constantly like unruly brats, but because they don't recognize the value of being number 2. Like, it's simply not possible for everyone to be number one and those that think they are should remember Katrina and be vigilant to stay clear of my path."
So I'm like: "Woux, dude, I know how you mean, they got no respect."
An He's like: "Bless you my son"
An I'm like: "Yeah, made in Your image an being number 2 totally sucks"
And so that's how I got this smoking crater where my head used to be. Now I'm thinking maybe we should redesign the western Pantheon of God, Jesus, Mother Mary, Saint Elmo, Satan, Bezelbub & anybody else you have a problem with, to be a more socially viable if we want to avoid Armageddon & ten thousand (more) years of strife & conflict. Some suggestions are:
1) nobody with gods arrogance will ever find peace in the world, so thenceforth god will no longer be number one, so if (as they say) we're made in His image, we won't then be reflecting his selfishness and can afford to be more agreeable to get along.
2) Jesus must screw, all the hippy Jesuses did (god kicked them out of heaven for it & gave them aids). But Jesus is "God in the flesh" with human faults and he never screws? that dog don't float, it's just trouble waiting to happen, so make it ok, god needs grandkids.
3) Satan and the minions of hell shall be fallible. Like Santa Claus, the devil supposedly knows what you're thinking, and will punish you for it, forever. But why should the Fallen One provide the world with any reason to avoid eternity in screaming agony? It's counter productive. If I were the devil, I'd have a more laid back image, (maybe talking geckos for salesmen) and a more credible game plan, because ABSOLUTE, non negotiable anything is either a sign of A) challenge, or B) ignorance. Say it's challenge, Satan wants you to not fall for his gambit, like he's really Jehovah undercover, trying to make you good, but God wouldn't lie, and Satan wouldn't NOT want you to burn forever in eternal damnation. So it must be B) ignorance: Satan is therefore the Great Bush, and must bear the associated stigma of farce.
Gods Favor
While driving down the highway in my smoking VW bus, we find we're being followed closely. Not by the usual police, but by Hummers, Mercedes, and BMWs, i.e. gods chosen. We naturally assume they want us to teach them the meaning of existence, but actually they want to pass because we're going slower than the speed limit.
Meanwhile my alter ego, claiming gods favor, cruses the interstate at 10 miles over the speed limit. It's a state of grace, music is on the radio, the air conditioning is inaudible. In the slow lane, the poor people, humble and ignorant, strive to justify their existence. I have no problem with them, I'm courteous, gracious, they don't bother me unless they question my claim of Gods favor.
Claiming or even looking for gods favor is the egos ultimate expression, justification for any action, I do it because I'm righteous. (you infidel pig of a roach) (I meant that in a good way)
Like I was talking to God the other day & he said "Alas my creations are unbearably stupid. It reflects on me, not because they fight constantly like unruly brats, but because they don't recognize the value of being number 2. Like, it's simply not possible for everyone to be number one and those that think they are should remember Katrina and be vigilant to stay clear of my path."
So I'm like: "Woux, dude, I know how you mean, they got no respect."
An He's like: "Bless you my son"
An I'm like: "Yeah, made in Your image an being number 2 totally sucks"
And so that's how I got this smoking crater where my head used to be. Now I'm thinking maybe we should redesign the western Pantheon of God, Jesus, Mother Mary, Saint Elmo, Satan, Bezelbub & anybody else you have a problem with, to be a more socially viable if we want to avoid Armageddon & ten thousand (more) years of strife & conflict. Some suggestions are:
1) nobody with gods arrogance will ever find peace in the world, so thenceforth god will no longer be number one, so if (as they say) we're made in His image, we won't then be reflecting his selfishness and can afford to be more agreeable to get along.
2) Jesus must screw, all the hippy Jesuses did (god kicked them out of heaven for it & gave them aids). But Jesus is "God in the flesh" with human faults and he never screws? that dog don't float, it's just trouble waiting to happen, so make it ok, god needs grandkids.
3) Satan and the minions of hell shall be fallible. Like Santa Claus, the devil supposedly knows what you're thinking, and will punish you for it, forever. But why should the Fallen One provide the world with any reason to avoid eternity in screaming agony? It's counter productive. If I were the devil, I'd have a more laid back image, (maybe talking geckos for salesmen) and a more credible game plan, because ABSOLUTE, non negotiable anything is either a sign of A) challenge, or B) ignorance. Say it's challenge, Satan wants you to not fall for his gambit, like he's really Jehovah undercover, trying to make you good, but God wouldn't lie, and Satan wouldn't NOT want you to burn forever in eternal damnation. So it must be B) ignorance: Satan is therefore the Great Bush, and must bear the associated stigma of farce.
Gods Favor
While driving down the highway in my smoking VW bus, we find we're being followed closely. Not by the usual police, but by Hummers, Mercedes, and BMWs, i.e. gods chosen. We naturally assume they want us to teach them the meaning of existence, but actually they want to pass because we're going slower than the speed limit.
Meanwhile my alter ego, claiming gods favor, cruses the interstate at 10 miles over the speed limit. It's a state of grace, music is on the radio, the air conditioning is inaudible. In the slow lane, the poor people, humble and ignorant, strive to justify their existence. I have no problem with them, I'm courteous, gracious, they don't bother me unless they question my claim of Gods favor.
Claiming or even looking for gods favor is the egos ultimate expression, justification for any action, I do it because I'm righteous. (you infidel pig of a roach) (I meant that in a good way)
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Stuff concerning the Texas branch of the new polygamist church of the latter day saints:
This post is more than atheistic & antisocial, it's probably tacky & I apologize for that, but it describes stuff that's simply not questioned, or acknowledged, stuff fundamental (if you will) to our own, and many other species lives. Stuff that should be referenced somehow before undertaking anything which might otherwise require a short prayer.
this is a partial, exemplary list of un-citizenly behaviors:
Disrespect is the main one, (all others follow) for example disrespect of the Sea, of Death, the Unknown, and areas of Karmic response (like pissed off motorists and large men w/ chainsaws wearing goalie masks). These require an assessment of potential for which we're unavoidably responsible, with the caveat of stupidity.
Stupidity is socially acceptable to respectable people, because a stupid person would seem to be unaware, and they make the lives of respectable people look coherent. Without The Stupid, their lives would be meaningless. Or rather, without someone stupider than ones self, the pecking order could shift up a notch, and irrelevancy could happen to YOU.
My 8th grade math class was seated by order of achievement. The girl of my dreams was at the front nearest the teachers desk (Mrs. Witt), I sat in the last seat farthest from the desk (but nearest the door), and behind several inbred hillbillies. Charlie R. sat in front of me, and gave me answers (IQ of 60, in 1959, Special Ed. was only one class during study hall), which were useless, but he was a genuinely good guy (and stupid). Charlie was a good guy because his survival trait was agreeability, he was forced to be sucessful because nobody had his back, whereas the hillbillies all had giant beetle browed cousins.
Shame can be great stuff, porn actors get off on it. It seldom gets real public scrutiny though, either by the people who like it or the people who hate it. So what is it?
Schmeegle the Gollum killed his fishing buddy. Some say it was out of greed, others say it was because he was weaker than the ring of power (well who isn't?). He was ashamed to hang with his people afterwards though, & the ring seemed to be enough to get by on. He was still Hobbit enough to honor those values he dumped on himself for, & he couldn't let go or reconcile, so he became schizophrenic. The fact that his insanity saved the world is seldom mentioned because his actions appeared to be selfish (rather than stupid or altruistic), but we'll never know for sure, so he'll mostly be remembered for his treachery and fantastic CGI animation.
Ok, treachery means selling out your people. If you're not ashamed for that, you're probably psychopathic (which means lacking the ability for remorse, and thus, you have a great future in politics), or inhuman. Inhuman isn't a fair lable though, because dogs are more loyal than people, even though they & other carnivores usually require food rewards for their loyalty, not so with Meercats in their own society, but they, like dogs, expect it from humans, so though I'm not an animal whisperer, I suspect their infidelity revolves around mistrust. As a human I couldn't blame them, but this definition is getting anthropomorphic, so lets get back to whatever the topic was, oh yeah... treachery, well that about covers it.
Now getting back to shame: the final judgment on shame comes from ones self, it's decided by what's really detrimental to personal success. Islamist, Jews, Meercats and Christians all follow approximately the same code when it comes to premarital sex, which is (in case you haven't heard) that you shouldn't do it.
How come?
Because un regulated population uses up more resources than the populators can supply (because they're otherwise distracted), so everybody looses (except psychopaths, and cannibals). So then why don't these societies promote birth control? It's not because laws governing marriage and promiscuous behavior were written before birth control existed, there's always been birth control (though often drastic in some respect).
Rather, the nature of power is such that it requires sacrifice and obeisance. And getting a population to deny their sexuality, (sometimes donating their forskins, or sewing up their vaginal labia) is real obesiance. Starting on a family level (because mom says), through tribal (because Cochise says), and (viola) ending with national policy and church doctrine (because W says). Leaders depend on ritual warfare, sacrifice, and ancestor worship to legitimize their rule. In the old days, some forced their retinue of wives, concubines, and servants to follow them into death. Meercats don't do that, but every baby Meercat is taught by physical & social contact, to stick with the group, and that ostracization is fatal, and stupid.
In other words, population control is a survival trait of the species, whereas powers' control over it's followers is a survival trait of the leader.
With this contradiction of intent, we have the formula for schizophrenic policy on who controls reproductive rights, which (like Schmeegle) can't let go or reconcile.
....
Part of the concern about sex comes from parents worried about breaking their family group, and part comes from social institutions concerned about losing control of their social base. Sex is dangerous to learn, not so much because of predators & pervs but more from hormonally forced rationalization, which causes a change of personal fidelity to be possible. To preserve continuity of known social patterns, both institutions have vested interests. A solution would be to formulate a structure for rationalization, that maintains existing ties. "Yes, you can spend the night over there, but call us first so we know where you are", & stuff like that. By the way, kid sex is at least as real to kids as grownup sex is to adults, the hormones sometimes aren't identical, but they still compel, and the result is the same.
Teaching kids about close encounters affects their social competitiveness as much as sports. The kind of teaching influences the effect. I don't advise anything though because acceptability changes from region to region, and the topic is usually taboo because of the above vested interests, so: Good Luck. A lot depends on the circumstances, of "the taboo topic which must not be named" though, and I suspect it's associated strictures are a lot like fundamentalist strictures everywhere, for example Mohammed said women shouldn't travel alone, for the simple reason that at the time it was dangerous, and he looked forward to a day when women could travel alone. But later fundamentalist interpretation (in this case, including the court) means "not ever, under any circumstances". The looming commitment of having "inter-age" sex in contemporary society, can't be applied equally, and it's easy for the stronger and more sophisticated partner to diminish the other. With that in mind, all kinds of legal protection for jail bait can inspire respect from even the most jaded pervert, but who protects the adult? Heck, adults can protect themselves, right? not if fundamentalistic judgment causes them to loose their job, home, family, & community respect. A court system that allow that (much less promotes it) assures it's own future relevance, but aggravates the problem.
The problem here is that the state enforces a set of values which are just as fundamentalisticly dumb as the Revised Church of the Latter Day Saints. Don't get me wrong, they both creep me out in their own way, but I can say that because I, (like the church and the state), have my very own blog which doesn't allow comment, so I don't have to consider opposing views :-)
Australian Aborigines have a system of keeping rampant sexuality under control by marrying everybody twice. The first marriage is at the age when kids are likely to cause trouble through social competition, or by creating indiscriminate, unwanted mouths to feed, at puberty, around 9 to 12. Their first spouse is typically an elder living alone because the elder's own second spouse has died. The effect of the old/young marriage is that it pairs both groups w/ each other at an age when they can most agreeably benefit from their partners age, the kid learns about social responsibility, has boundless sexual energy that keeps the elder focussed and competitive, and the elder has someone to care for them and make them socially relevant. The first marriage lasts till the elder dies, like about 5 to 15 years. Then the kid is an adult who has learned to take care of a household, and is free to marry again to have kids of their own. The Aborigine culture has persisted for 10 to 40 thousand years, in a land where even ants struggle to survive, until european laws made it illegal to have sex with kids.
This post is more than atheistic & antisocial, it's probably tacky & I apologize for that, but it describes stuff that's simply not questioned, or acknowledged, stuff fundamental (if you will) to our own, and many other species lives. Stuff that should be referenced somehow before undertaking anything which might otherwise require a short prayer.
this is a partial, exemplary list of un-citizenly behaviors:
Disrespect is the main one, (all others follow) for example disrespect of the Sea, of Death, the Unknown, and areas of Karmic response (like pissed off motorists and large men w/ chainsaws wearing goalie masks). These require an assessment of potential for which we're unavoidably responsible, with the caveat of stupidity.
Stupidity is socially acceptable to respectable people, because a stupid person would seem to be unaware, and they make the lives of respectable people look coherent. Without The Stupid, their lives would be meaningless. Or rather, without someone stupider than ones self, the pecking order could shift up a notch, and irrelevancy could happen to YOU.
My 8th grade math class was seated by order of achievement. The girl of my dreams was at the front nearest the teachers desk (Mrs. Witt), I sat in the last seat farthest from the desk (but nearest the door), and behind several inbred hillbillies. Charlie R. sat in front of me, and gave me answers (IQ of 60, in 1959, Special Ed. was only one class during study hall), which were useless, but he was a genuinely good guy (and stupid). Charlie was a good guy because his survival trait was agreeability, he was forced to be sucessful because nobody had his back, whereas the hillbillies all had giant beetle browed cousins.
Shame can be great stuff, porn actors get off on it. It seldom gets real public scrutiny though, either by the people who like it or the people who hate it. So what is it?
Schmeegle the Gollum killed his fishing buddy. Some say it was out of greed, others say it was because he was weaker than the ring of power (well who isn't?). He was ashamed to hang with his people afterwards though, & the ring seemed to be enough to get by on. He was still Hobbit enough to honor those values he dumped on himself for, & he couldn't let go or reconcile, so he became schizophrenic. The fact that his insanity saved the world is seldom mentioned because his actions appeared to be selfish (rather than stupid or altruistic), but we'll never know for sure, so he'll mostly be remembered for his treachery and fantastic CGI animation.
Ok, treachery means selling out your people. If you're not ashamed for that, you're probably psychopathic (which means lacking the ability for remorse, and thus, you have a great future in politics), or inhuman. Inhuman isn't a fair lable though, because dogs are more loyal than people, even though they & other carnivores usually require food rewards for their loyalty, not so with Meercats in their own society, but they, like dogs, expect it from humans, so though I'm not an animal whisperer, I suspect their infidelity revolves around mistrust. As a human I couldn't blame them, but this definition is getting anthropomorphic, so lets get back to whatever the topic was, oh yeah... treachery, well that about covers it.
Now getting back to shame: the final judgment on shame comes from ones self, it's decided by what's really detrimental to personal success. Islamist, Jews, Meercats and Christians all follow approximately the same code when it comes to premarital sex, which is (in case you haven't heard) that you shouldn't do it.
How come?
Because un regulated population uses up more resources than the populators can supply (because they're otherwise distracted), so everybody looses (except psychopaths, and cannibals). So then why don't these societies promote birth control? It's not because laws governing marriage and promiscuous behavior were written before birth control existed, there's always been birth control (though often drastic in some respect).
Rather, the nature of power is such that it requires sacrifice and obeisance. And getting a population to deny their sexuality, (sometimes donating their forskins, or sewing up their vaginal labia) is real obesiance. Starting on a family level (because mom says), through tribal (because Cochise says), and (viola) ending with national policy and church doctrine (because W says). Leaders depend on ritual warfare, sacrifice, and ancestor worship to legitimize their rule. In the old days, some forced their retinue of wives, concubines, and servants to follow them into death. Meercats don't do that, but every baby Meercat is taught by physical & social contact, to stick with the group, and that ostracization is fatal, and stupid.
In other words, population control is a survival trait of the species, whereas powers' control over it's followers is a survival trait of the leader.
With this contradiction of intent, we have the formula for schizophrenic policy on who controls reproductive rights, which (like Schmeegle) can't let go or reconcile.
....
Part of the concern about sex comes from parents worried about breaking their family group, and part comes from social institutions concerned about losing control of their social base. Sex is dangerous to learn, not so much because of predators & pervs but more from hormonally forced rationalization, which causes a change of personal fidelity to be possible. To preserve continuity of known social patterns, both institutions have vested interests. A solution would be to formulate a structure for rationalization, that maintains existing ties. "Yes, you can spend the night over there, but call us first so we know where you are", & stuff like that. By the way, kid sex is at least as real to kids as grownup sex is to adults, the hormones sometimes aren't identical, but they still compel, and the result is the same.
Teaching kids about close encounters affects their social competitiveness as much as sports. The kind of teaching influences the effect. I don't advise anything though because acceptability changes from region to region, and the topic is usually taboo because of the above vested interests, so: Good Luck. A lot depends on the circumstances, of "the taboo topic which must not be named" though, and I suspect it's associated strictures are a lot like fundamentalist strictures everywhere, for example Mohammed said women shouldn't travel alone, for the simple reason that at the time it was dangerous, and he looked forward to a day when women could travel alone. But later fundamentalist interpretation (in this case, including the court) means "not ever, under any circumstances". The looming commitment of having "inter-age" sex in contemporary society, can't be applied equally, and it's easy for the stronger and more sophisticated partner to diminish the other. With that in mind, all kinds of legal protection for jail bait can inspire respect from even the most jaded pervert, but who protects the adult? Heck, adults can protect themselves, right? not if fundamentalistic judgment causes them to loose their job, home, family, & community respect. A court system that allow that (much less promotes it) assures it's own future relevance, but aggravates the problem.
The problem here is that the state enforces a set of values which are just as fundamentalisticly dumb as the Revised Church of the Latter Day Saints. Don't get me wrong, they both creep me out in their own way, but I can say that because I, (like the church and the state), have my very own blog which doesn't allow comment, so I don't have to consider opposing views :-)
Australian Aborigines have a system of keeping rampant sexuality under control by marrying everybody twice. The first marriage is at the age when kids are likely to cause trouble through social competition, or by creating indiscriminate, unwanted mouths to feed, at puberty, around 9 to 12. Their first spouse is typically an elder living alone because the elder's own second spouse has died. The effect of the old/young marriage is that it pairs both groups w/ each other at an age when they can most agreeably benefit from their partners age, the kid learns about social responsibility, has boundless sexual energy that keeps the elder focussed and competitive, and the elder has someone to care for them and make them socially relevant. The first marriage lasts till the elder dies, like about 5 to 15 years. Then the kid is an adult who has learned to take care of a household, and is free to marry again to have kids of their own. The Aborigine culture has persisted for 10 to 40 thousand years, in a land where even ants struggle to survive, until european laws made it illegal to have sex with kids.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)