Friday, May 28, 2010

End Priestly Celibacy? Let's hope not!

CNN reports that a dozen Italian women have written an “open letter” to the Pope asking him to rescind the celibacy requirement for priests. They cite illicit relationships by priests as being predominant, and call the ruling a man made law (as though there are any other kinds other than laws of physics, etc.) Here’s the whole story:

On facebook and various message groups around the net the general consensus is that this would be a good thing. I couldn’t disagree more.

I’d just as soon see them retain the celibacy rule which has been a factor in the inability for the Catholic Church to attract new shaman. They are already having problems getting enough priests to staff churches all over the US resulting in churches being shut down and consolidated. Thus, celibacy works in our favor over the long run. Between priest shortages, a pedophile suborning pope and Catholic hierarchy, and their obscene position on discouraging condoms in third world AIDS ravaged countries; the Catholic Church has never been closer to self destruction. Why fix what’s not broken, or ... er ... what deserves to be broken?

Some people are saying that allowing priests to have a normal sex life would reduce pedophilia among the clergy. Nonsense! Pedophiles don't stop being pedophiles just because they are given permission to marry and boff consenting adults. Besides, do you REALLY want these purveyors of medieval ignorance reproducing? I don’t think so.

To counter these women’s heretical suggestion we should all write a letter to the pope telling him we support celibacy. And that if the Church abandons it’s long held and proper conviction, and the celibacy requirement is relaxed, we will melt down our gold crosses with the miniature Jesus on it; pound our Mary on a Half Shell into plaster dust; auction off our authentic foreskins of Jesus on ebay; and become godless heathens.

Now, who’s the pope going to listen to …a dozen women who are obviously after some priestly nookie; or 10,000 devout Catholic men who know the evils of carnal lust? For the pope that would be a no brainer (no pun intended).

Monday, May 24, 2010

Texas leads the way ... in utter stupidity

You've probably heard that the Texas School Board voted to re-write, distort, and otherwise pervert their social studies text book state wide.

These bible banging right wing born again Christians have decided that Thomas Jefferson was being given too much credit for his leadership and down plays the concept of the Separation of Church and State guaranteed under the 1st amendment and confirmed by the Supreme Court. The book will proclaim that the US was a Christian nation founded on Christian values ( I assume that means we as a nation endorse killing fig trees, conducting exorcisms, infecting herds of pigs with demons, and encouraging horse thievery -- all New Testament values).

Their changes also give Ronald Regan and Newt Gingrich the kind of coverage previously reserved only for the greatness of Lincoln and our Founding Fathers; claim that the McCarthy Communist witch hunt of the 50’s was justified; devotes pages of accolades to Confederate leaders; and decries the United Nations as imperiling America’s sovereignty.

What Texas high school students will now get is an education not from an impartial historical perspective, but from the fanatical perspective of far right conservative fundamentalists. Lucky them. As if Texas wasn’t already a hotbed of religious delusion, and blind devotion to stupidity … now their children will be receiving a religio-political rewrite of our nation’s history.

Texas has often set the standard for school books. Since they have such a large population of school kids, publishers typically seek to use the same books all over the country. Already some states have moved to block the Texas version of US history so as not to infect their states with Texan insanity, ostensibly putting the publisher on notice that that version will not be accepted in their schools.

What’s next? My guess is some bible belt states will pick up this version of revisionist history. Then, Texas science books will be perverted to include rebuttals to evolutionary theory, Creationism, Intel-Design, Young Earth-ism; Noah’s flood being the cause of the Grand Canyon; resurrection of the old “missing link” bugaboo… wtf knows how far these mindless religious freaks will go?

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: they should change that insipid motto “Don’t mess with Texas” to “Don’t mess with Texas -- we’re already as fucked up as we can get.”

Friday, May 21, 2010

facebook Announcement: Pen Names Verboten!!

I interrupt my usual blog postings for this announcment.
In the words of Mark Twain: "Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated".

For those of you who have friended me on facebook under my nom deplum "Dromedary Hump," and have been unable to access my facebook page since Thursday, my apologies. Facebook suspended my account on Thursday afternoon. It seems they require a legal name, not a professional name. This after having my DH name specifically approved by a facebook rep some five months ago.

I have provided them with my legal name-- Bart Centre--and they will be reinstating the account hopefully within the next 24 hours. Dromedary Hump will be added to my account as an alternate hidden name which would pop up if searched. Hopefully, all of my friends will be retained with the new account name.

In responding to them and giving them my name I asked if "Mark Twain," the pen name of Samuel Clemens, would also be rejected. My guess is their response will be something like "Mark WHO?" Oh well, I knew Mark Twain, and I'm no Mark Twain. ;)

Thanks to those of you who have emailed me with your concerns. I'd hate not to be able to converse with you on a daily basis. I've gone through fb withdrawal over the past 24 hrs.


Monday, May 17, 2010

Make the May 20th “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day” National Stand Against Tyranny Day

After the Prophet Mohammed was depicted on Comedy Central’s South Park back in April, a Muslim website threatened them with death. Oh, not in so many words…they just posted a warning that what happened to Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh might just befall them.

Van Gogh had the unmitigated nerve to depict Mohammed in one of his films. That blasphemy cost him his life at the hands of a follower of the "Religion of Peace.” Kurt Westergaard, the Danish cartoonist who drew unflattering cartoons of Mohammed a few years back (some of which are reproduced in this post) is still under threat of a death fatwa and is in hiding. Just last week a Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who drew Mohammed as a dog back in 2007 was assaulted during a lecture by a Muslim who was part of the group seeking to punish him. Vilks is a professor of art theory at the University of Uppsala in Sweden.

Comedy Central, showing all the courage of a rabbit, censored subsequent broadcasting of the Mohammed character storyline, effectively caving into the threats of extremist Muslim imbeciles. After all, no American has ever risked their life for free speech, why should Comedy Central be the trend setters? Oh wait… lots of Americans have fought and died for our right to free speech. Oh well, never mind.

In an admirable display of ballsiness Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris asked fellow illustrators all over America to show their solidarity in support of free speech as granted under the 1st Amendment; to stand up to those throwbacks who would impose their will and truncate our rights with threat and innuendo. She suggested that on May 20 cartoonists draw and display their depictions of the Prophet Mohammed. Unfortunately, fearing for her life, Norris wimped out and backed off her suggestion.

I’m not a cartoonist, but I am an advocate for free speech, no matter who it offends. Supporting free speech doesn’t mean supporting only speech you like or agree with, but this is lost on the followers of Mohammed. This is America, not 7th century Saudi. I don’t, none of us should, kowtow to demands of those to whom free speech is but a phrase and who value ignorant superstition over one of our most cherished rights. As Ben Franklin is credited with saying: “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” I’ll give up not a jot of my liberty.

Thus, the images that follow represent my stand against those who would attempt to coerce freedom loving people into silence. No amount of threat will force me to abandon my rights, nor will it succeed in imposing respect for their senseless religious precepts, prohibitions and medieval culture.

So now what? Fatwa? Jihad? Am I to become camel hump hummus for Achmed and Abdul tonight? Here’s a suggestion for the thug followers of the pedophile prophet and purveyor of ignorance, enslavement and death: "Pound sand, this is America!" Stand up against tyranny, on May 20 depict a picture of Mohammed.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Myth of the "Angry Atheist"

“Dawkins and Hitchens are angry atheists as are so many atheist bloggers. Their style is off putting to atheists, agnostics and theists alike and is detrimental to the spread of freethought.”

I’ve heard/read that kind of criticism frequently from other atheists and agnostics. Most often it comes from our Humanist and Secular Humanist brethren. I refer to these freethinkers as the “pass no judgment, kinder gentler, live and let live” branch of the atheist family tree, and that’s fine.

But I cannot abide their holier than thou attitude that we atheists who are confrontational are simply angry, and that this supposed anger represents a threat to the spread of freethought among the religiously impaired.

What they frequently perceive as anger would be better described as frustration and disgust with theist non-think; theist rejection of prima facie evidence of scientific truths and reality and acceptance of the falsehood of supernaturalism. It's the same kind of frustration/ disgust one might feel for people who still believe a woman's place is in the home -- that she should be kept uneducated, barefoot and pregnant. The same frustration/disgust one has watching a shouting / sweating / bombastic shaman extract money from impoverished believers in exchange for faith healing prayers. The same disgust I have for 911 conspiracy theorists, or Obama “birther” fanatics.

Thats not to say that there are no actions that arouse anger in atheists, especially anti-theists. But this anger is directed at the actions of some theists’ -- not their beliefs. I.e.: I have anger for the purveyors of anti-gay hate who proclaim themselves "loving Christians;" anger toward people who send us to war, or who kill innocents in the name of their god; anger for those who distort history and science and try to impose their lies into our schools, government, and lives. I am angered by parents who withhold medical help from a dying child because the bible told them so. And I reserve the right to be angered by churches who turn a blind eye to, and cover up, the immoral acts of their employees. I would express that same anger toward anyone, believer or non-believer, who would actively promote hate, subjugation, lies; or allow their delusions or position of authority to degrade our freedoms, our constitution or cause harm.

That there are thinking people; Humanist, Secularist, agnostic or atheist who DO NOT feel anger for those horrendous actions is a mystery to me. That theists or some freethinkers are put off by justifiable expressions of disgust (in absurd belief) or anger (in unjust action) simply cannot be of any concern to me. Anyone who proposes that by suppressing ones sense of indignation and wrapping it in some warm and fuzzy cloak of genteel complacency it is more prone to get fanatical religionists to stop their harmful acts and throw off their ignorance, hateful prejudices and delusions—then they are just suffering from another kind of delusion.

The “angry atheist” is a myth. When I, when any atheist, expresses anger at the actions of some religionists it’s not because I am an atheist, it’s because I am a freedom loving human being enraged by the unjust acts that mindless devotion to ignorance promotes. Period. That I happen to be an atheist doesn’t make me an “angry atheist” any more than being openly angry at that injustice makes me an “angry Independent,” “angry retiree,” “angry veteran” or “angry American.”

As the bumper sticker says “Well behaved women rarely make history.” Similarly, it wasn’t well behaved atheists who won us the right to profess our non-belief openly, to have atheist organizations, blogs and books without fear of retribution.

To those who distain the outspoken confrontational nature of activist atheist & anti-theist bloggers who call it like they see it; or to those who bemoan the in-your-face style of the Dawkins’, Hitchens’, Harris’ or the Madalyn Murray O’Hairs who have done so much to pave the way for the spread and openness of freethinking, I say if thine eye offend thee pluck it out, and suck it up.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

The Ten Commandments as basis for US law : Are Xtians REALLY this stupid?

I’m up to here [picture the height of my hump] with Xtians mindlessly attributing US law to the Ten Commandments. Fact is, they have absolutely zero to do with our laws.

There were three versions of the commandments. One was verbally dictated by Moses. The second was when he spent 40 days on Mt. Sinai chiseling them into two stone tablets which he promptly smashed in a rage. The third was a replacement for the ones Moses broke. Each set was different. The first set didn’t even discuss murder or stealing until it hit the thirteenth commandment (Exodus 20:2-17) and had a total of 17 commandments. The second set (Deut. 5:6-21) had 21 commandments. In the third set (Exodus 34:11-27) Gawd added even more self serving crappola and out did itself with 27 commandments. They are now pretty much shaken, stirred, blended, redacted, edited and reorganized into what we now call the Ten Commandments. Of course, very few Xtians are aware of this.

Yet Xtian fanatics insist the Ten Commandments of lore are the basis for western civilization’s and US laws, and demand they be placed on public property, in government facilities, given special reverence and consideration in violation of the prohibition against endorsement of any religion by the secular state. They try to pass it off as “history” not religion to circumvent the 1st amendment. I say the first issue of Playboy is history, and ever so more instructive. Should they thus share equal space in our government buildings?

The first four commandments are self serving ego trips and religious demands by their fictional Sky Daddy that are not anywhere in our Constitution. In fact, it would be a violation of the 1st amendment of the Constitution if they were.

There are no laws requiring anyone to honor their parents; nor prohibiting being envious of your neighbor’s property, or his wife, or his “ass”. Also not in the Constitution. (V, X)

While there are archaic laws in some states about adultery, it is a throw back to theist think. They are not enforced (and certainly not punished by stoning to death as prescribed in Talmudic law); and is also omitted from our Constitution. (VII)

Lying is not illegal either, only committing perjury while under oath in a court is punishable by our laws; or lying to obstruct justice. (IX)

So this leaves the prohibition against killing (theists say “murder”) and stealing (VI, VIII). But, both of these prohibitions predate Xtianity AND the Hebrew bible, having been codified by the early Egyptians, Hindus (India) , Babylonians (The Code of Hammurabi), and Chinese.

Finally, all US law is based on English Common Law, which pre-dates the arrival of Christianity to Britain by 200 years, as Thomas Jefferson pointed out.

So out of ten “commandments” only 2 ½ (murder, stealing & perjury) are part of our law, and would exist without the Hebrew Ten Commandments based on pre-Xtian English common law, and basic precepts that gave order to societies all over the planet well before the story of Exodus was written.

Not one in 10,000 Christians will know this, understand this, or embrace this. It’s just too full of reality, fact and documented evidence all of which could be researched and confirmed by anyone with average intellect, an iota of curiosity, and interest in the truth. Unfortunately, most Christians lack those attributes.

And on it goes.

Monday, May 3, 2010

Hump accepts the King of Kings

I can no longer deny my Lord and Savior. For I did, this very day, partake in His Goodness. I ask you all to join me in The King’s Prayer.

Verily when I hungered He fedith me.
When I thirsted He gave me carbonated drink.
When I lacked for sodium His fries satiated me with the salt of the Earth.
He anointith me with His trans-fat free oil.
Yea, though I drove to the window without funds He taketh my Amex Card.
His forever smiling countenance shines down upon me from my TV screen.
Surely His calories and fat content shall follow me all the days of my life; for my ass grows large like a fatted calf.

Some doubters may ask “But Hump, there are lots of icons of fast food that you could embrace and worship. Why pick The King over all others? ” Oh ye of little taste. The answers are obvious and all around them if only they could open their hearts, mouths and cholesterol clogged arteries to the Truth.

First, anyone who has taken Communion with The King and tasted of His body …
The A-1SteakBurger* [* a registered trademark of His Supreme Holiness] … and felt His beefy juiciness and His tangy sauce upon their tongue would know that this is food from a King …not a clown.

Second, He gives us Free Will to “Have it Yah Weh,” even to choose between sides of fries and sides of onion rings, both drenched in the flowing fat of His being.

Third, much as only a beast of the field would feed from a trough, so only the misguided followers of a white suited mustachioed old red neck would eat from a bucket. They follow a false God, and shall some day choke upon the wishbone of the Great Deceiver.

Fourth, Wendy is in fact the Whore of Babylon; with her prepubescent freckles, unbridled hair, and promise of juiciness that can barely be sopped with multiple napkins. Shame! Woe be upon those who partake of her temptress’ wares!

Finally, The King sacrificed His head and His face and replaced it with an oversized molded plastic model for us in order to cleanse the world of creepy painted clown faces.

Hear Me O readers!! Only the fool says in his stomach that “The King is not LORD.”
For to deny Him condemns you to eating burgers with a “special sauce” the origin and content of which only the Clown (Satan’s minion who doesn’t look like the fiend in Stephen King’s “It” by accident) knows.

You’ve been warned. Now, go forth; have lunch; and may the King bless you, and provide you with extra packets of Heinze, the blood of His body. Ask and ye shall receive.

[thks to Tracey for the inspiration for this article]