Some Holiday and New Years Wishes from the Camel

Whether you are observing Sol Invictus; the birth of the gods Tammuz or Mithras; Saturnalia; the winter solstice; Yule tree worship; a purely secular Xmas, or (dog forbid) a tradition Xmas, I trust all of my readers are having an enjoyable time with friends and family. Nothing brings us together, or says remembrance of mythical man-god made up birthdates or the celebration of natural cosmological events, like December 25.


As we approach the end of 2012 I have a few wishes for the New Year:

- Health, happiness and prosperity for us all.

- A healthy and happy new baby for my eldest and his wife next April, my first grandchild.

- A wonderful new life together for my youngest son and his new bride.

- An accelerated withdrawal from Afghanistan.

- Another year of erosion of religion here and abroad

- A year with fewer declarations of divinely inspired and supported hatred and inane madness from religious shaman and their mindless followers

- Less child abuse cases, murders and destruction in the name of their nonexistent god.

- More exposure and prosecutions of clergy and church hierarchy misdeeds.

- More legal victories by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and other Freethinker orgs against religionists who spit on the Constitution and equate godliness to patriotism.

- More activism and visibility by secularists around the nation and the world to inspire closeted freethinkers to come out and speak up.

- The televised celebrations of Fred Phelps, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, and Terry Jones funerals narrated by Ricky Gervais, with the tune “Don’t Let the Door to the Outhouse Hit You in the Ass on the Way Out.” playing in the back ground.

- A pair of baby camels delivered to the Camel Ranch, free of charge - freight prepaid - one male one female.

That’s it. I’m easily satisfied. I don’t ask for much.
Have a happy New Years , be safe, and keep practicing Faithicide.

A few words on the Newtown, Connecticut horror

Like you and the rest of the nation I am distraught beyond words at the massacre in Connecticut. The horror, the very scope of destruction, is almost more than I can wrap my head around. I find a tear coming to my eye with every story about the victims and the many expressions of sympathy from around the world. I'm in mourning for those children and their teachers.


But now the media coverage has become obsessive, almost circus like in it's repetition and desperate grasps at new angles and obscure interviews. It is verging on becoming a morbid dance of death. We've heard everything we need to hear, and I wish it would stop.

Perhaps you, like me, are disgusted with the grotesque references to prayer, god, heaven, angels, jesus and all the predictable platitudes that the religious drag out whenever a tragedy happens. Religious bloggers and their sheeple who hallelujah their exhortation to prayer (for what I wonder); the crazed pastors and televangelists with their insipid and sickening declarations of why this happened, ranging from the ever popular "God called them home," to it being attributed to god's vengeance for his "not being allowed in school"; and the simply religiously infected need to espouse their religious beliefs publicly and wallow in a kind of breast beating and self flagellation... it all disgusts me.

It is the religious' trained response to inexplicable, and unfathomable acts of natural destruction and insanely driven acts of "evil." It's what they do in reaction to their impotence to do anything meaningful. It's what they've been indoctrinated or paid, to do. I despise the religious all the more for it.

But, I won't judge the parents and families of those victims the same way. They have entered a real hell, the hell no parent should ever experience. Let them express their grief and relieve their pain anyway they can...they will, sadly, have a life time of it. If their exhorting a god to explain, or imploring it to give it meaning, or praising it for taking their child to an imagined Candyland (instead of interceding on the child's behalf and averting the horror in the first place) is what they need to do to assuage their grief, then so be it.

Let them find what comfort where they can. I hope they find some measure of it, for there - but for the finger of fate - go us all.

Onward Atheist Soldiers: Let’s fight to preserve Christmas

I’m told by conservative news outlets that it tis the season for me to become engaged in a war. Seems that we, the godless heathen masses that makeup 8% to 15% of this nation’s populous, are once again rallying our massive collective power and influence in an effort to eliminate one of the most important holidays that the 76% majority hold so dear. Who knew?

Actually, they have it all wrong. The holiday shopping season is a veritable “God send” to our economy. It is expected to generate $590 billion in retail sales, a 6% increase over last year. Approximately 600,000 temporary jobs are created to service this sales volume; jobs that will help people pay their rent, buy gifts for their loved ones, and like wise stimulate the economy. Never mind the billions spent on Xmas trees, postage for holiday greeting cards, UPS/Fed Ex delivery costs and holiday food. As a capitalist I love Christmas. "The chief business of the American people is business," as Calvin Coolidge said. The last thing I’d want to see is the disappearance of Christmas. One has to wonder how much stronger China’s GDP would be if their 1.3 billion population were 76% Xtian instead of the roughly 7-10% it is now. I’m glad it isn’t.

I’d defend to the death Frosty the Snowman’s right to melt; Charlie Brown’s annual disappointing trip to the Xmas tree lot; George Bailey’s suicidal trip to that snow covered bridge; the Grinch’s efforts to mess with the heads of the denizens of Whoville; and Natalie Wood’s right to doubt Santa. These TV shows generate millions more in advertising that add to the nation’s financial stability and growth. After all, that’s what Xmas is all about… well, that and sharing fun, food and a warm fireplace on a snowy night with your family.

War on Xmas? Nope…I love Xmas. All people who want to see a strong economy should love Xmas. I fully endorse every man, woman, child and family pet being designated as each families personal diety upon whom gifts are heaped. If there were an organized effort to eliminate Xmas I’d strap on my body armor, lock and load my AR, man the barricades and willingly shoot the first ” Kill Kristmas” banner waving anarchist, anti-capitalist, agrarian society proposing low life that ventures into my crosshairs.

There is, however, a more covert and insidious movement a foot to kill Christmas. It comes from extremists who think Rudolph and Santa aren’t the true harbingers of Xmas – declaring them a perversion of the season; who deride the national spending frenzy as antithetical to the meaning of Christmas.

These are fanatics who believe that men dressed in golden finery, waving smoke pots, chanting mumbo-jumbo and staring into the plaster eyes of the bloody effigy of a corpse is what is important. Or that erecting make-believe scenes involving plastic non-existent wise men, virgins, camels and baby man-gods on public property is what’s really important. Organizations that use this time of year to ring bells and beg for money to do good works, which they also use promote delusion and oppose equal rights for everyone. These are the real warriors against Christmas. Fortunately those minions of cultist delusion are a small minority and growing smaller all the time. Eventually they will simply fade into obscurity taking their absurd interpretation of the holiday with them.

Warrior against Xmas? Not here. On Xmas Eve I plan to hang my dead Jewish man-god piñata from the rafters, hand out bats, and let the good times roll.

What’s behind this fascination with Jesus’ erection?

Back in the 50’s the Knights Of Columbus (a fraternal organization of  Catholic nutters who wear funny hats and carry ceremonial swords) erected a statue of Jesus on federal property in Montana. Painted in flesh tones, with a blue robe, the life size idol stands adjacent to a ski trail on a national park.  It is an obvious and blatant violation of the 1st amendment, as its presence on federal land is tantamount to the government’s endorsement of a specific religion. Christianity. Its continued existence is being challenged by the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Today the courts agreed the suit can go forward.

As usual the religious are up in arms at the godless’ attempt to have Jesus displaced.  Oh, they know it’s blatant a violation of the constitution, or at least their legal council knows it, but that doesn't matter to them. Evidently after fifty years they figure Jesus is beyond some imagined statute of limitations.  Their argument makes as much sense as finding out a hypothetical county in Alabama forbids blacks from voting, but defending continuation of said violation because it’s been that way since reconstruction.

Similar violations of religious statues and symbols on public lands have been the subject of ongoing challenges. In some cases they've been removed, or encapsulated with plywood pending court decisions.  In others the public land where the icon stands has  been sold to sectarian organizations to circumvent the law.  The battle goes on.

What’s behind this Xtian fixation with erecting graven images and execution devises on land your and my tax dollars paid for and support? Does their scripture demand idol worship on public property? Has Jesus now declared that what is Caesar’s should be encroached upon and possessed by Jesus, in direct contrast to his admonishment to keep Caesar’s and God’s property / tribute separate [Mark 12:17] ? Is the faith of Christians so weak they need to have public reminders that they are superstitious throwbacks? Is their private property or church holdings so sparse that they are insufficient to contain their grotesque religious renderings of death devises and Jewish zombies?  Doubtful.

What it comes down to is promoting the faith and using the government as co-conspirators in their proselytizing scheme.  No innocent trespass of the law, this is a full fledged frontal attack on separation of church and state, and clear intent to promote their religion as the preferred belief. 

They’ll deny this, of course. But it doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict their response if adjacent to their statues the government was pressured to provide equal recognition for all other beliefs.  In fact, that may be the best tact the FFRF could take.  For every Christian symbol on public property demand equal space for the Pastafarian’s noodley god, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, complete with meatball eyes and bright red marinara sauce.  Insist that a Wicca goddess, a Satanist effigy of Satan, a Muslim crescent, and a full color life size rendering of Ganesh, the four armed elephant god of the Hindus in all his colorfully hued skin tones, keep Jesus company.

One of two things would have to happen. Either the government would be forced to remove all the offending Xtian symbols thus resolving this issue once and for all; or they would be forced to provide equal space and prominence to these competing religious symbols to avoid the endorsement of one religion.

Frankly, I wouldn't care which one it lead to. Either would satisfy me as long as the erections of Jesus and Satan were the same size. 

The “New Atheist!!” pejorative: An activist’s badge of honor

Chris Stedman is a “Humanist Chaplain” at Harvard University - an oxymoron in my opinion. He purports to provide guidance (non-spiritual I assume) to secular students, akin to the guidance a Catholic, Protestant or Jewish chaplain might provide to their spiritual flock.

Mr. Stedman is a self described “faithist.” He wrote a book by the same name.   That’s a pejorative term he claims some atheists use to describe non-believers who feel a kinship toward believers, seeing them as people whose beliefs are worthy of respect; down playing the differences between non-believers and believers; ignoring for all he’s worth the uglier side of religion that historically has been and currently is a blight on humanity, instead preferring to focus on issues we have in common.  I never heard the term “faithist,” but if my synopsis holds water, then “faithist” equates to “Uncle Tom atheist.”in my parlance. I prefer the latter as a more succinct descriptor.

Mr. Stedman eschews the attitude and activism of  “New Atheists.”  Apparently that term, which I have heard bandied about by religionists as well, is meant to describe any atheist who decries religion inspired injustice or religious intrusion into our lives; or combats believers efforts to breakdown the “wall of separation” or claim it to be a fraudulent concept.  It includes any atheist who doesn't sit still in the face of attempts to impose Creationism into public schools or a religious test to be a science teacher; or who initiates a law suit when the school permits the name Jesus to be invoked in prayer or on school banners, or the ten commandments enshrined on a public building; or who pushes for equal space when a nativity scene is erected on public property.  Any atheist who thinks the world would be a better place with the demise of religion.

To Stedman (is it Reverend Stedman? Father Stedman?) these things make atheists unlikable because it points out our differences with those religionists who feel compelled to promote blatant attempts at history revisionism, the dumbing-down of our schools, and out right proselytizing for a “Christian Nation.”  It makes us look bad to the Christian majority. It irks them.  He doesn't like that.

In short the “New Atheist” is different from the plain old atheist because we won’t step off the curb and cast our eyes down when confronted by religious violations of the constitution and common sense. 

We won’t shuck and jive and shuffle our feet when the Christian Taliban passes laws declaring non-belief in god’s role in ensuring the security of our nation a crime punishable by imprisonment (Google “Kentucky God Security Law). 

We won’t stay quietly in the closet anymore when believers proffer their scripturally supported belief in non-science, reproductive rights, or who can marry who in a secular nation.  You know... like the “New Blacks” (AKA “Those Uppity Nigras”) who wouldn't ride on the back of the bus.  Or the “New Gays,” (AKA “Militant Faggots") who won’t sit still for being the target of  homophobes.  Or the “New Feminists” (AKA “Femin-Nazis" according to Rush Limbaugh) who won’t have their reproductive rights dictated to them by misogynistic old Christian white men.

But there’s nothing new about atheism. What’s new is the dwindling power and influence of the Church over thinking people.  What’s new is we no longer have to fear Inquisition, torture, imprisonment, execution or expulsion from the community.  We no longer have to pretend to be believers to earn a livelihood, or stay alive. What’s new isn't so much the atheist activism, as it is the loss of power, influence, and threat of retribution that religion and religionists have enjoyed for 1700 years or so.

Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899), Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), Madelyn O’Hare (1919-1995) , Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011),  Dawkins, Harris, along with thousands of other open and in your face atheists past and present who refused to roll over - all were, it seems, “New Atheists” to Stedman and those who wield the term at atheists like an exorcist wields a bottle of holy water at his victim  

Never mind that the very people decried by Stedman  are the very people to whom he owes his open non-belief and his very position at Harvard.  Without their activism he’d still be in his closet and wouldn't be pandering his “I’m not like THEM, I’m one of the good heathens” to his believer bedfellows. 

There’s nothing new about me being an atheist...been one since my late teens.  But if you want to tag me with this inventive term coined by religionist’s in fear of their dwindling influence and numbers, and picked up by accommodationist non-believers to ingratiate themselves to those who’d happily enslave him to their belief system, then feel free.

I’ll wear “New Atheist” with the same pride I do “Godless Hell Bound Heathen” -  as a badge of honor, a symbol of strength of conviction, a testament to my reason.

A Thanksgiving Story: There is a limit to my hospitality.

Charlie is the county transsexual. Fact is he is also the county drunk, ex-con, and meth addict.  Disowned by his parents as a teenager, he dropped out of school, lived on the streets of Keene, ran afoul of the law, dabbled in unsavory social behaviors, and was incarcerated for five years.  Somehow he got the state to pay for his sex reassignment surgery.  Charlie is now Charelene. (That's not Charelene above, but the resemblance is close enough for it to be her brother/sister).

Charelene’s new persona hasn't improved her social graces.  Unemployed, unhygienic,   homeless; sporting a perennial five o’clock shadow owing to her lacking the funds to maintain her hormone treatments; under nourished, and devoid of any sense of fashion or make-up artistry, Charelene is the poster girl for destitute.  She is a veritable pariah to the community; the kind of person that would prompt a stray dog to cross the street to avoid contact with her. 

Thanksgiving afternoon, as my wife was doing her thing in the kitchen, and I and my younger son, up for the traditional feast with his fiancée, watched football on TV there was a knock at the back door.  Shit, unannounced company on Thanksgiving. This can’t be good.  I padded to the back door.

There in all her glory was Charelene looking her Thanksgiving worst. She was accompanied by a tallish, blue eyed, long haired guy with a soft countenance in a pristine white robe. His entire being had a glowing radiance emanating from his body.  I recognized Him immediately from the traditional 19^th century white Anglo Saxon image  of the non-Jewish concept of Jesus. 

“We’re here for Thanksgiving, my son.” Jesus spoke with an upbeat lilt to his voice.

I looked the pair up and down for a nanosecond.  “YOU’RE welcome to join us for dinner, but we don’t serve HIS kind here.”  I snarled.

My reply caused a pained expression to come over Jesus’ calm demeanor. I could tell I was in for a sermon.

“My son, I know you to be a non-believer.  I understand that you reject all manner of superstition and gods, me included, as being imaginary; that the cause of faith is rooted in man’s inability to divest himself from ancient myth devised as societal control and to answer that which his unscientific mind could not answer.

 Yes, I know that you know religion and belief have been the cause of great injustice and suffering.  I accept that you can cite centuries of acts of brutality, intolerance, genocide, and irrational obstacles to science, reason, and people’s pursuit of happiness perpetrated by my blind faith zombie like followers. And even as I stand before you, I know that you are rational enough to know you’re dreaming my presence, or that it’s the result of celebratory liquid refreshment hallucination.

But I have always perceived you to be a man of compassion, a person of ethics; someone who has been non-judgmental when it comes to being charitable to those in need. For often you have said morality and goodness towards ones fellow man does not depend on a boogie man’s dictates or threat of eternal punishment.  That the thinking can be good without God because empathy is a byproduct of evolution and that the suffering of others does not serve society but diminishes it.”

At about this point in his soliloquy Jesus was getting himself worked up. He took on the persona of God the Father made popular in Michelangelo’s painting.  His voice rose to a thundering crescendo as he lifted his right hand above his head, index finger pointed skyward.
 
“Thus, verily I say unto you that by turning away this poor soul, this ‘least among us,’  this  homeless,  downtrodden, rejected and dejected,  impoverished, and put upon denizen of society it gives lie to your oft  touted  goodness without God.”   His last three words were accentuated by dark and stormy eyes that glared at me below a knitted brow , exuding condemnation and accusation of hypocrisy.

I glared back:  “I was TALKING to Charlene, asshole!”  

Pro-Gay Rights and Virulent Homophobe: The many faces of God

A gay activist and columnist, who is also the Christian son of his minister father,  wrote the following as part of his attempt to reconcile why some Christians seek to suppress and condemn his lifestyle/sexuality as a sin against God, while others accept him. 

"... we have tons of Christian denominations and even more unaffiliated belief sets being forged every day. Maybe it's because God wants them all to be able to reach such a diverse humanity. Maybe it's because God's love is greater than any of us can understand.”

Or maybe it's because there is no God. Of course, this most simple and obvious answer is never on the menu of options among the religiously afflicted.

No, gay pastor’s kid, you didn't chose to be gay...any person whose mind isn't clouded by religious fundamentalism knows this. You also didn't choose to be a religious believer, nor is it a biologically determined trait.  You acquired it through early and often indoctrination by your shaman parent. 

Being gay is no "sin" (whatever that means). But being a grown up and still believing in fairy tales sold to you by your parents, the same fairy tale that justifies your Christian neighbor's discrediting and demeaning you, and denying you full the rights he enjoys - THAT’S your "sin." .  That you don't understand the paradox of your own belief system is your trespass against modernity, your crime against reason.

One man’s god of compassion is another man's god of homophobia. Gods are created in man’s likeness, his character, only more so ... to the ultimate degree.  Gods are ultimately more jealous; ultimately more loving; ultimately more punishing, more forgiving, more murderous, more torturous, more magnanimous, more benevolent, more powerful, more judgmental, more egotistical, more genocidal, more destructive, more accepting, more intolerant than those who created him. Look at man's palate of traits, and God/gods will have them in spades.  A god’s magnified human traits, its excesses, its lack of moderation, give grounds for its creators to do good or do bad.   

So why shouldn't some religious invoke God's angry wrath against gays who are condemned by the Old Testament? And why wouldn't other religious invoke "We're all God's creations and he made us this way and loves us."?  One embraces the god of ones own liking.  

A god will wear whatever faces a cult, a sect, a denomination, a gay rights activist, a gangster, a liberal, a conservative, a hater, a fanatic, or a maniac believer wants it to wear. That is both the beauty and the horror of imaginary friends.