For Acharya's Main Website, go to

TBK News Table of Contents

Bookmark and Share
Join the TBK Mailing List!
Enter your name and email address below to receive news and cutting edge commentary from Acharya!

Subscribe  Unsubscribe 

Thursday, July 27, 2006

More Unmitigated Evil from the Unholiest

I hate to constantly emphasize the evil of the world, and I do attempt to balance it with a positive outlook for the future, but since the evil just keeps coming, I feel the need to be one of those who fight it back. Let us not sit idly by while such absolute evil is exported to our overly welcoming shores. And in case you do not think that it can be, be aware that, per my recent post regarding circumcision - which has thus far caused a bit of a stir around the globe - the incidence of female genital mutilation in the United States has skyrocketed in the past several years since the American borders were flung open to FGM-practicing immigrants. I have no doubt that these demented and vile people called "mullahs" are exporting their own heinous methods and ideology to the rest of the world, with deranged followers gleefully ready and willing to execute such brutality according to their whims.

If we are to create a better world - and, as the mother of a precious being, that is my main goal - we simply must keep our eyes open to the evil that will insidiously and assuredly infiltrate our potential paradise if left unchecked. Here is an unfortunate example of just such evil. There are those in the rabblerousing realms who unthinkingly support the Iranian government because it is ostensibly the "enemy of their enemy." These individuals do so at their own and our peril, because said "enemy of the enemy" is not our friend.
By Susie Boniface

IT WAS exactly 6am and the start of another blisteringly hot summer day when 16-year-old Atefeh Rajabi was dragged from her prison cell and taken to be executed.

Every step of the way the troubled teenager plagued by mental problems shouted 'repentance, repentance' as the militiamen marched her to the town's Railway Square.

The Iranian judge who had sentenced Atefeh to death was left unmoved as he personally put the noose around her neck and signalled to the crane driver.

Kicking and screaming, Atefeh was left dangling for 45 minutes from the arm of the crane as the crowd sobbed and - under their breath - damned the mullahs.

Atefeh's crime? Offending public morality. She was found guilty of 'acts incompatible with chastity' by having sex with an unmarried man, even though friends say Atefeh was in such a fragile mental state that she wasn't in a position to say no."...


PENALTIES imposed by Iran's religious mullahs include:

THEF T: Amputation of hands or feet for persistent offenders.

ADULTERY: Death by stoning.

UNMARRIED SEX: 100 lashes.


SODOMY: Death for adults, 74 lashes for consenting child.

LESBIANISM: 100 lashes, or on the fourth occasion death.


RUBBING ANOTHER MAN'S THIGHS OR BUTTOCKS: 99 lashes - on 4th occasion, death.

Monday, July 24, 2006

Circumcision is Evil!

There, I said it. Let me say it again: Circumcision is evil. Period. Don't give me your "religious covenant" or "hygiene" crap. No decent god would be interested in you attacking a baby boy's most sensitive body part with a knife and hacking it off. And only in rare circumstances - such as an unusual illness or if you reside in extremely unsanitary conditions - would "hygiene" have anything to do with it. To say that we must slice off - and sometimes tear - a defenseless baby boy's foreskin "in order to prevent infections" is as nonsensical as saying that we should excise little girls' nipples "in order to prevent breast cancer."

The fact is that, other than the rare case where infection does occur, which may or may not require surgery, circumcision is a totally unnecessary barbaric rite with no basis for existing in the civilized world. If you've been circumcised, I'm sorry. I'm certain that it hurt very badly and that it has had long-lasting, traumatic effects. If you've had your children circumcised, again, I'm sorry. I wish you had read this rant before you did so.

"Circumcision is the most commonly performed surgical procedure in the United States today."

Over the past decade or so, I have met and communicated with two world-renowned "anti-circ" scientists, including pediatrician Dr. Paul Fleiss, who told me he had performed "thousands" of circumcisions before he saw the light, and neuropsychologist Dr. James Prescott, who has evidently proved that circumcision causes irreversible brain damage. The foreskin is, after all, not a "useless piece of skin" but a highly complex organ. What does circumcision do, exactly? Dr. Fleiss describes this "denuding of the penis":
Depending on the amount of skin cut off, circumcision robs a male of as much as 80 percent or more of his penile skin. Depending on the foreskin's length, cutting it off makes the penis as much as 25 percent or more shorter. Careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off more than 3 feet of veins, arteries, and capillaries, 240 feet of nerves, and more than 20,000 nerve endings.31 The foreskin's muscles, glands, mucous membrane, and epithelial tissue are destroyed, as well.
As one can see, it is not a matter of snipping off a little skin, and it is logical to suggest that removing this material would have an effect on the brain as well. Regarding his efforts in demonstrating that circumcision causes brain damage, Dr. Prescott writes:
"The NICHD, NIH refuse to conduct the studies that I have requested over the years using fMRI and MRI technologies to document the proposed brain damage. Be assured the damage will be found when the studies are conducted - on both males and females."
Dr. Prescott's proposal is entitled, "Consequences of Perinatal Trauma - Genital Mutilation/ Circumcision - and Somatosensory Affectional Nurturance Upon the Adult Brain: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) and Positon Emission Tomography (PET) Scan Evaluations of Brain Structure and Function." The abstract is: "Draft Research Proposal that describes the rationale and specific brain structures for scanning the genital sensory projection fields of cerebral neocortex and cerebellar cortex and related brain structures to determine structural and functional (fMRI) deficits consequent to genital mutilation."

Drs. Fleiss and Prescott are quite passionate in their crusade to end useless, ritual circumcision. Unfortunately for them, they cannot be as forthright as I can in stating loudly and clearly that CIRCUMCISION IS EVIL. (In my own limited crusade, I fervently hope someone makes a song by that title.)

Think about it. You're a baby boy who has just come into the world. Now, it's hard enough on you, because you've been growing inside this cozy, dark womb with this loud but comforting wooshing sound. All of a sudden - bam! - you're popped out into this horribly bright room with some awfully frightening noise. Then you are separated from your mother and stuck all alone in an incubator. A few days later, someone attacks your penis with a knife - almost always done without anesthetic, but the anesthetic itself would require a needle stuck in your penis. The pain is so excruciating that you may pass out. Infants often go into shock from the pain, but the ridiculous human mind in denial has claimed they are "sleeping!"

Now, mothers of boys who are being circumcised will at times fight this barbaric mutilation and often feel like they've been stabbed in their hearts when they lose the battle. It is quite likely that the babies themselves - most certainly traumatized - are acutely aware that their mothers have "abandoned" them and failed to protect them against a vicious and despicable attack. It seems logical to conclude that this trauma may have a lifelong affect on a male's attitude towards his mother and women in general - could circumcision be contributing to the widepread misogyny of the world? In reality, it is quite likely that in some cultures - warrior cultures - circumcision was designed in large part to destroy this mother-son bond in the first place. Which means that this male genital mutilation has nothing to do with a "good god" in the first place and everything to do with barbarism. Frankly, when I think about the suffering this horrid behavior causes to defenseless babies, I feel overwhelmed by nausea, and my heart becomes sore. In order "not to offend anyone," I have pushed this subject into the back of my highly empathetic mind for years. If I'm offending you now, too bad. There are adorable little boys the world over who are about to be attacked, and I am not one to stand by while babies are being assaulted. In fact, I am offended - nay, outraged - that I have to live in a world where this appallingly sick behavior goes on all the time, with people either defending it or not giving a rat's ass about it. You can call it whatever you wish - you can in your petulance call me whatever you wish - but the fact will remain that genital mutilation is a brutal, physical assault against a baby or a youngster by adults who should know better.

In case you're still unconvinced, here is a description of infant male genital mutilation, euphemistically called "circumcision," from
How is circumcision done?

Most parents don’t know what is actually done to a baby when he is circumcised. The baby is placed spread-eagle on his back on a board and his arms and legs are strapped down so that he can’t move. His genitals are scrubbed and covered with antiseptic. His foreskin is torn from his glans and slit lengthwise so that the circumcision instrument can be inserted. Then his foreskin is cut off....

Circumcision is extremely painful – and traumatic – for a baby. Just being strapped down is frightening for a baby. The often repeated statement that babies can't feel pain is not true. Babies are as sensitive to pain as anyone else. Most babies scream frantically when their foreskins are cut off. Some defecate. Some lapse into a coma. The reason some babies don't cry when they are circumcised is that they can't cry because they are in a state of shock. Most babies are circumcised without an anesthetic. Anesthetics injected into the penis don’t always work. Being stuck with a needle in the penis is itself painful for a baby, just as it would be for anyone else. Babies are rarely given pain medication right after they are circumcised or during the week to ten days it takes for the wound to heal. Pain medication is not always effective and is never 100% effective....

Most parents who see what is done to a baby when he is circumcised and how he reacts decide against circumcision and let their baby keep his foreskin intact.
I am hesitant about providing a photo of a helpless baby enduring such torture. Suffice it to say it is horrendous. Instead of posting this image of a baby boy strapped to a circumcision board and screaming in terror, I am hotlinking it. View it at your own peril.

As we know, there are all kinds of claims concerning the supposed "health benefits" of circumcision, such as the prevention of infections, HIV transmission and cancer, but I do not think that any of them are worth subjecting an infant to such torture as depicted in that image - one of millions - "just in case." Circumcision is evidently a panacea that "cures what ails ye," based on numerous "scientic studies" of the past. In this regard, Dr. Paul Fleiss states:
Circumcision started in America during the masturbation hysteria of the Victorian Era, when a few American doctors circumcised boys to punish them for masturbating. Victorian doctors knew very well that circumcision denudes, desensitizes, and disables the penis. Nevertheless, they were soon claiming that circumcision cured epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, elephantiasis, tuberculosis, eczema, bed-wetting, hip-joint disease, fecal incontinence, rectal prolapse, wet dreams, hernia, headaches, nervousness, hysteria, poor eyesight, idiocy, mental retardation, and insanity. In fact, no procedure in the history of medicine has been claimed to cure and prevent more diseases than circumcision....

Today the reasons given for circumcision have been updated to play on contemporary fears and anxieties; but one day they, too, will be considered irrational. Now that such current excuses as the claim that this procedure prevents cancer and sexually transmitted diseases have been thoroughly discredited, circumcisers will undoubtedly invent new ones. But if circumcisers were really motivated by purely medical considerations, the procedure would have died out long ago, along with leeching, skull-drilling, and castration. The fact that it has not suggests that the compulsion to circumcise came first, the "reasons," later.
Unseemly as it may sound, the fact is that, rather than having appropriate medical reasons for removing a baby's foreskin, the medical industry is making big money from selling foreskins, which is a major reason it is unwilling to condemn circumcision. Circumcision is in fact a multibillion-dollar-a-year industry.

"The doctors aren't going to put an end to circumcision: They make huge sums of money to mutilate the babies."

As I say, if you or your loved ones were needlessly circumcised, I'm sorry. There appears to be little that can be done, although some people have undergone for reconstructive surgery to restore their foreskins. There are people attempting non-surgical methods as well. There are also support groups for men who feel circumcision has seriously damaged them, which I believe in many cases it has.

If you have an infant son or are about to have one, please do not circumcise him! Let us please allow our defenseless children to live their lives in happiness and comfort, unharassed by such a heinous thing as having the most sensitive parts of their bodies hacked at with a knife. How very upsetting and repulsive it is to consider that this barbarous act goes on day in and day out, around the world! If we are to ever see a healthy human society, genital mutilation - of both males and females - simply must stop.

Friday, July 21, 2006

Celebration of Life

Here's an oldie but goodie from The Gospel According to Acharya S.

Celebration of Life

What is the purpose in life? Is it simply to follow rules and rote that make people into robots and clones? It is clear that human beings, free from stifling and enslaving ideologies, can become great, exalted and divine. While it is crucial and good to engage in the breaking down of these divisive and dangerous ideologies that make human beings less glorious than they truly are, it is also necessary to identify that glory, such that we may all strive to attain to it. The human experience has always been one of extremes, and we have seen how negative extremes have manifested themselves in the human species and in the natural world around them. We have attempted to destroy these divisions. Now is the time to reveal the beauty and vivacity of the butterfly that emerges when the dead and desiccated cocoon is removed.

When are Human Beings at Their Best?

When human beings have fully blossomed, when they've reached a certain level of soul maturity that is balanced, neither too aggressive nor too ineffectual, they are a wonder to behold, bursting with life and love. These divine beings have a tremendous sense of humor, knowing well that there is no reason to take this long, strange trip seriously. This wondrous state of being does not require extraordinary intelligence but wisdom, which can be found even within a tiny seed. The intelligence it does require is that which compels all living creatures to truly be alive. This natural state is in fact the same in which animals live; it is not difficult to attain. Yet, because of ego encrustation, many people cannot regain this experience, which is that of childhood.

People at their best maintain the awe and wonder of a child while developing the responsibility and integrity of true adulthood. They are sensitive and empathetic, sharing in the pain of others and providing remedy. Yet they are not emotional basketcases who become too debilitated by tragedy for their own good and that of others. Of course, such an experience is necessary for a soul to mature, but there comes a time when one has had enough and demands change for one's own life, those of loved ones and of all life in general. The metamorphosis into a true human being is propelled by the painful experiences. At the point of blooming, one has truly decided that pain is to be avoided and that one's actions will be designed to provoke the most amount of happiness and bliss.

For the rest, please see Celebration of Life.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

What is God?

Here is an oldie but goodie that someone requested I post to my blog. I have only posted the first few paragraphs of it, with a link to my TBK website.

What Is God?
Is God a giant man in the sky? No, God is the life force pervading the cosmos
by Acharya S
"Beware of the man whose god is in the skies." --George Bernard Shaw.

"The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by 'God' one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... It does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity." --Carl Sagan

"I just read your essay titled 'What is God?', and before I look any further into your site, I'd like to tell you that I found it the most truthful piece of spiritual writing I have ever read. So concise, a real stimulation unhindered by myth, parable and occult symbolism." -- S, Australia
What is God? Is God a giant man who once incarnated as his own son 2,000 years ago through the womb of a woman in the Middle East? Certainly not. Is God a man who created everything we see? Wrong again. These stories are just perceptions filtered through the limited human mind. They are not ultimate truths. Is God male? No way. This is an erroneous interpretation by the male ego.

"God" is the Life Force

One can think of God as the life force or sentience that permeates the cosmos, gravity or levity, it matters not. As an example of such an energy, one can take a plug and stick it into an electrical outlet - this is what becoming spiritual is all about. One becomes plugged into "God." But think about that electrical life force: It has no form. In other words, it's not a human being. It has no gender; it's not a male. It has no color; it's not white. It has no size and no container. That life force, or "God," is not a giant white man, as we have been told, who can mysteriously incarnate himself through the womb of a virgin of any particular ethnicity. Rather than being historical, these are myths that are merely symbolic for the creation of matter out of spirit.

In the Far East, this life force has been discerned as and termed "the Tao." The Tao is the "thing" that makes birds chirp, cats purr and the sap of the trees run. We can also call it cosmic consciousness. It is simply an energy, sentience or spirit that pervades all things. Far from having gender, as we have been led to believe, it is the magnetic principle between the male and female potencies. It is also the male and female polarities themselves. This Great Spirit, Tao, or God, encompasses all things. If it is not all-encompassing, it is not God. Anything less than the total is not God. The definition of "God" is omnipresence itself. Nothing is outside of "God."

For the rest, please see What is God?

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Human Abusers

Are you a human abuser? Have you been taught and brainwashed that human beings are pathetic born-in-sin pieces of garbage? If you're a Christian, you have been taught just that, and if you're a reformed Christian by any other name, such as a New Ager or Buddhist, you likely still believe that humans are horrible wretches who need constant work and "processing," "enlightenment" or other fixing. If you're a Buddhist/New Ager, however, you have entirely missed the point of "enlightenment," in that you do not approach others as if they are "the Buddha," i.e., with dignity and respect. In the case of human abusers, other people are decidedly not the Buddha but merely disgusting and foul human beings who deserve to be abused.

This rude and obnoxious perspective is unfortunately widespread, as people the world over do not approach each other with kindness, love and respect but with suspicion, mistrust and exploitation in mind. There is a reason to be suspicious, of course, since many human beings are foul and will indeed exploit one and do one tremendous harm. But, there needs to be a balance between living in fear of evil people and happily trusting good people and enjoying life. How do we find that balance?

First of all, we need to stop brainwashing - braindirtying, as the case may be - our sweet, innocent little children into believing that they are bad, dirty and sinful. How very cruel it is to tell a cute little child such garbage - and how abusive. As far as I am concerned the Christian crud being programmed into little children constitutes child abuse, and its insidious effects are all around us, whether or not the individual calls himself a Christian. Child abuse is not easy to overcome, as it leaves a permanent scar on the psyche - and that's the whole point of proselytizing Christianity, replete with the gore of human sacrifice called "the Passion," to an innocent child's ears and mind.

At a carnival recently I observed Christian evangelists painting children's faces for free. The catch was not that there was Christian proselytizing literature lying around but that the children were being preached to as they sat there. In a low, sinister voice obviously designed not to be overheard by the parent, the proselytizer would robotically pick up a colored crayon, dip it into water, begin painting the child's face and whisper what the color represented. I didn't hear much other than what the color black represented: To wit, sins, such as "vandalism" and "drug addiction." The sinisterly whispering proselytizer recounted a litany of such sins, all represented by the color black, and told the child that "the punishment for sin is death." Nice, hunh, to tell a small child? Now, what is that innocent child going to think everytime he or she sees the color black? What about black people?

Sorry, but doing this brain-dirtying to your children or other people's children is not a "godly" mission but child abuse, pure and simple. And it is not something that we can just look away from, as the results of this abuse permeate our world, with adults who become human abusers. As a critic of such behavior, I am frequently on the receiving end of such abuse, by individuals who arrogantly and egotistically believe that they know me and that they are better than I am and hence have the right to abuse me. My person has been characterized by such individuals - who run the gamut of labels - in every evil manner imaginable, so that they can justify their sadistic abuse of me. If you read my writings, you will notice that I very infrequently "attack" named or designated individuals. On my entire TruthBeKnown website as well as this blog, I can only think of one person whom I have named and pilloried, other than a couple of sentences addressing bad behavior on the part of a couple others. Otherwise, I do not personally attack anyone, unless I myself am thus attacked. In such a case, of course I will defend myself! What did they expect when they attacked me? Ah, but you see, human abusers expect you to lie down and take it, beg for mercy and agree with them about how evil and unworthy you are. That's the response they want. So if you actually defend yourself, they become even more abusive and start ranting about how "angry" you are. Oh yes, I've heard it all - and what a demented mindf**k that one is! Well, of course, I'm angry, you psychotic moron! You just came into my face and started personally attacking me, casting all sorts of foul aspersions and falsehoods upon my character.

The fact is that people who are abused as children often grow up to be abusers and that religious proselytizing to a young, innocent mind frequently constitutes child abuse. The most "religiously" abused children are often the most hateful adults. So, if someone describes him or herself as "religious" or even "spiritual," watch out, as he or she will likely fly off the handle and become extremely abusive if his or her self-righteous surface is scratched. The remedy for such ongoing and multigenerational abuse, of course, is to remove its source, in this case the brainwashing of sweet, innocent minds with the hateful idea that they are born-in-sin pieces of garbage. Shake it off! Get rid of it and celebrate life!

Sunday, July 16, 2006

New Age Phonies

News flash: I didn't just fall off a turnip truck yesterday. In addition to the weeping and wailing from the believing camp and the snooty disregard from the non-believing camp comes the nose-in-the-air pretensions of the New Age crowd - all of these factions are united in their attempts to dismiss my opinions. The Christians, of course, are quite convinced that they have got the true and correct belief system, while the atheists believe the same thing, and the New Agers are certain that they are the chosen people. All have one thing in common, and that is the conceit that they each know it all.

My opinions are vexing to the Christian because I'm perceived as an "atheist," while the atheists get up in arms because I'm "too mystical," but the New Agers are sure that I haven't experienced enough satoris or samadhi. (You see, you need to have a fancy Indian name as a pedigree for your mystical experiences, or they don't count.) In order to garner respect from the New Age snoozers, who seriously believe that they can think themselves into and out of any situation, you must park your cushion and spew a bunch of meaningless platitudes about "love,"
"God," "the universe," "spiritual union," etc. I got news for you, been there, done that. I've had just about every mystical experience in the books, which is why I don't entirely dismiss them - a fact that gets me into trouble with the atheists. I've read the best and worst of 'em, meditated upon my navel for hours on end, experienced countless satoris - including the "Cosmic Orgasm" or "Oneness with the universe," which is widely perceived as "enlightenment." It is this reality I have experienced that has allowed me to see what I see.

The conceited New Ager who believes that he or she is residing in pristine reality is no less deluded and no more enlightened than the average religious fanatic. The New Age goal seems to be to accumulate enough wealth to be able to live in hot tubs on Maui. I have rarely encountered a hardcore New Ager who wasn't completely self-absorbed in his or her attempt at becoming egoless. The most fanatical of these almost have less respect for other people than the members of the tribes to whom New Agers arrogantly pretend to have become superior. They are always talking about "self-help" and "processing," and they assume that everyone else is as messed up as they are. "She needs this and that," they smugly pronounce as they pettily psychoanalyze each other. If you haven't done their favorite group, you're nowhere, man.

Meanwhile, with their heads in the clouds, life passes by the prancing New Agers, so superior and smug in their mystical beliefs. The truth is that the plateau that these individuals are stuck on is called "spiritual arrogance," not enlightenment. Enlightenment is x-ray vision that allows you to see through the crap, not a billowing balloon of hot air that blocks the view.

Beddru is Beddou is Buddha

In the past several years, the Jesus-mythicist school has been embroiled in a Kersey Graves-induced Beddru-ha-ha that has left insolent Christian apologists cackling and howling in a most unprofessional and unseemly manner. Joining in this cacophony has been the woefully uninformed response from the unbelieving world. Woefully uninformed, I say, because to my knowledge no one of the past 130 years or so since Kersey Graves wrote "The World's 16 Crucified Saviors" has ever looked as in depth as I have into the sources of the many assertions made by Graves. Despite this lazy lack of investigation and study of a salient subject that surely merits nothing less than a CSI-style forensic examination, the naysayers have nevertheless written contrived and capricious commentary which reveals that they are indeed less than expert on the subject, in a variety of ways, but especially as concerns Graves himself and the reasons for his claims. In fact, it is obvious that several of these hypo-critics have not even read Graves's book in the first place!

For the rest of the article, please see Beddru is Beddou is Buddha.

Friday, July 14, 2006

Good God!

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.... And God saw that everything he had made, and behold, it was very good."

So begins Genesis, the first book of the Bible, widely purported to be "God's Word," written by the very finger of God himself. But perhaps God should have left his handiwork at that, as what follows and what we are currently up to our eyeballs in, isn't particularly "good." You see, God next made the mistake of taking a handful of mud and giving it life, calling it "Adam," meaning "ground" or "earth."

Unfortunately, according to the biblical fable this creature God created is for the most part so atrocious that God eventually has to send a flood to destroy almost all humans on the planet, except for Noah, his wife, their sons and their wives. God, apparently, doesn't like to take shortcuts by just snapping his omnipotent fingers to change his error-filled creation, but evidently enjoys the drama of flooding the entire earth and watching all its creatures struggle in terror and die.

Which brings me back to the present, when a flood of biblical proportions seems warranted once again. Not that I would want to bring it on, but, see, God himself has this funny way of not really fixing things in his creation but simply wiping them away when they get too messy. He's not really a very good creator in the first place, as he makes some really lousy stuff - e.g., MAN, who is so imperfect that God can hardly contain himself in trying to fix him. Heck, God even came to earth as his own son, performing this bizarre human sacrifice trick that supposedly fixed everyone by wiping away all of those sins that God apparently mistakenly imbued man with in the first place.

So many sins, so little time, God sighed. Evidently, God had a big bag of sins lying around, so when he created Adam he just had to toss them into the muddy mix. Ah, say the believers, but that's where the Devil comes in. Well, no devil is needed, thank you very much, as God can take care of himself. Are you saying that God needed a perfect foil for his little drama, so he brought in the devil to torment and destroy what his Word supposes is his finest creation? Why, that sounds like blasphemy!

In any event, looking at the world's situation, where there are a bunch of human beings with a slew of differences, from skin color to political to religious, I have to wonder, what was God thinking?

Naturally, that's a rhetorical question, because this situation, where all these diverse human beings will simply never get along, pretty much proves that the biblical god is a myth, not a reality. Of course, the response to this rhetorical question will be also to blame the humans for their obviously overwhelming nature - endowed in them by their Creator, according to this mythology - and to invoke the case of "free will." But, that's merely a puerile and deleterious excuse to explain why this omnipotent and perfect God made such a cruddy creation in the first place.

The sooner more human beings question these issues, the better off we all will be. If humanity does not wake up to this free will-activated ability to question the concept of God and the universe, we will never see an end to the constant bloodshed and horror around the globe. And, so long as we are conditioned to believe that we are superior to other people because of our erroneous religious beliefs, we will never recognize the "god" within ourselves and other human beings, in order to afford us, them and all life with the dignity we deserve.

Sunday, July 09, 2006

Imbecilic Religion

As one may imagine, I've had my fair share of battles with arrogant, know-it-all religious fanatics on the internet, a good place to confine such battles if one wishes to have a social life. My perspective on religion and mythology is largely based on an anthropological model, with an eye to learning and knowledge. My emphasis on debunking the falsehoods within religion is secondary to my discoveries during my intellectual travels. In fact, the debunking only came because of my discoveries of the falsehoods and the unmitigated conceit that religion imbues in its adherents. I am first and foremost a scholar and scientist attempting to learn whatever I can about subjects that interest me. Fortunately for me, I do not have any religious beliefs to stand in the way of gaining such knowledge.

Not so with the majority of people who consider themselves "religious." The most fanatical are completely egotistical that they have found the "right" religion or belief system and that all others are false. Therefore, not only are they not to study any other religion but in fact they are supposed to shun all knowledge outside the limited framework of their beliefs. Hence, religious fanatics - God's most faithful - are also the most ignorant of humanity. Their ignorance is not limited to religion, however, as they gleefully and arrogantly slip their uninformed tentacles into just about every aspect of life, mucking up the works not with intelligence and facts but with smart-mouthed heckling and snide contempt of everyone and everything that exists beyond their extremely limited knowledge and education.

Trying to share interesting and important information and facts with religious fanatics is like attempting to sleep on a bed of nails. It is highly unpleasant and generally a complete waste of time. There is simply no reasonable person there who can say, "Really? Wow, that's interesting!" when they come across new information - and such utter ignoramuses must come across new information on a constant basis, since they know so little to begin with. Religion is the only arena in which the most ignorant person may be considered an "authority!" In religion, the less you know, the better. And it is so obvious to those of us who are not ignorant but who have studied these subjects that the real authorities like it that way, as one look at the manmade book of propaganda called "the Bible" will prove.

For example: "Obey the authorities in everything," squawks Paul, the establishment shill. In fact, at Romans 13, Paul exhorts:
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad....For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
And to whom is honor due? 1 Peter 17 has the answer: "Honor the Emperor!" The author of that epistle prefaces that remark by stating:
Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right... Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect...
Next, Paul tells the Corinthians (1 Cor. 14:33-35):
As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
More of the same sexist and barbarous blather can be found at 1 Timothy 2:11:
Let a woman learn in silence and with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.
If we inquire as to where sexism comes from, we need look no further than the "Good Book." The foaming-at-the-mouth abuse hurled my way over the years has certainly often smacked of such institutionalized sexism and misogyny. After all, I am a woman speaking "in church," i.e., the religious arena, and having authority over men! How dare I?! No matter what facts or information I may bring to the table, the lazy-minded and unintelligent bigots can swat it away simply because of my gender.

Paul further tells the Ephesians (6:5):
Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as to Christ...
Again, at Colossians 3:22, Paul says, "Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing the Lord."

And again, at 1 Timothy 6, Paul states:
Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.
Keeping slaves in line is obviously an important matter to Paul and his ungodly handlers, as at Titus 1:9, Paul once more exhorts, "Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect." But it isn't just the slaves, as a bit further at Titus 3:1, Paul tells his followers, "Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for any honest work..."

Not a word here objecting to the fact that there is slavery, and, of course, these verses have been used for centuries by unscrupulous and immoral "men of the cloth" - doing the Lord's work, naturally - to justify slavery. Yes, much more important than ending the suffering of millions of human beings, including children, has been the Lord's "good" name and "the teaching!" Ah, what a great religion!

I don't think it could be more obvious who really wrote "God's Word." The fanatic bibliolaters are in reality simpleminded pawns of the elite. But, my, they are good little ignorant foot soldiers, as they troll the internet looking for people who may have the audacity to point out the emperor's ugly naked body. The "religion of God" is actually the religion of the authorities, who are only too happy to keep their followers in a state of idiocy and ignorance. Their methods are to shut down the spread of knowledge - which is to me the heart of life - by training these moronic followers to ridicule and sass those who are usually far more intelligent and educated than they are. Hence, the world is often under the bullying dominion of mealy-mouthed know-nothings who personally attack those who are not in the same state of braindead mind control as they are.

Frankly, it is imbecilic to revel in such a lack of knowledge. It is the mark of imbecilic religion to encourage ignorance. Unfortunately, such blind faith is not merely imbecilic but also insidious and dangerous to the freedom and health of mankind and life in general.

Saturday, July 08, 2006

The Da Vinci Cod, Part Deux

Despite all the brouhaha, the "Da Vinci Code" movie seems to have evaporated into the ethers. To my knowledge, nobody's talking about it. There is, however, a repercussion of Dan Brown's work that needs to be addressed: To wit, a cottage industry of individuals claiming descent from Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. Without naming names and URLs, and giving them publicity or Page Rank, certain people are claiming to be descended from "the Merovingians" and thus, according to the legends popularized by Brown and the "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" authors, they are the direct descendants of Jesus Christ!

First of all, being a descendant of the Merovingians is not particularly unusual, as recent news articles have declared: "Genealogists discover royal roots for all. Millions have provable descents from medieval monarchs." I myself am provably descended from English King Henry II and Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine, who constitute one set of my 24th great grandparents. Much to the dismay of many people, I imagine, genealogists also state:
The longer ago somebody lived, the more descendants a person is likely to have today. Humphrys estimates that Muhammad, the founder of Islam, appears on the family tree of every person in the Western world.
The same could be said of Jesus Christ, were he a historical person who actually mated with Mary Magdalene. Crunching the numbers, practically all of us Westerners would be "grandkids" of JC and MM. According to the Jesus-in-India myth, many Easterners would also be descendants of Jesus, as would thousands of Japanese, per the Jesus-in-Japan myth!

But, it is my contention that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene are fictional characters, straight out of mythology, so they could not be spawning anyone, whether or not these claimants are descendants of the Merovingians. I further contend that these Merovingian legends are fiction designed to give that faction the "divine right to rule." The innocents among us appear to have little idea as to certain developments throughout the ages regarding mythology: Importantly, numerous families over the millennia have claimed descent from this god and that godman. Apparently, these recent claimants are oblivious to the claims of divine ancestry for all Egyptian kings and pharaohs, as well as for the royalty around the world. Were these claims of past royalty true? Did the gods who fecundated the mortal women who gave birth to these kings and queens really exist and walk the Earth?

In Greece, ruling families loved to claim they were descended from the Greek Son of God, Hercules. These families were called the "Heracleids," and they dated back many centuries before the Christian era. Does this fact mean that Hercules really walked the earth? If, by scientific scrutiny, we have determined that Hercules is a mythical character, then by the same scientific scrutiny - and integrity - we must also determine that Jesus Christ is a mythical character. Hence, no one - no matter how much they wish to be special - is descended from Jesus. It's all just another smelly fish story.

Sunday, July 02, 2006

Are You a Slob?

The following remarks were inspired by comments on my post about the Buffett-Gates merger, specifically regarding whether or not rich people are to blame for the state of the world.

While it is clear that in many places and under many circumstances, poverty on this planet is caused or exacerbated by greedy individuals who take advantage of others, the state of poor people is not always blameable on anyone or anything other than themselves. For example, while doing a favor for a friend recently, I ended up in a horrendous double-wide trailer occupied by some very slovenly individuals who were couch-potatoing it in front of the television while their "house" fell apart around them. It gave me the heebie-jeebies just being in the place. I am told that the husband, who looked quite able-bodied, doesn't work, while the wife holds down a fairly high-paying job, but you wouldn't know it from the condition of their home and property. Among other trash, rusted remains of cars riddled the outside, while dust and grime covered everything inside. The roof and ceiling were rotting, while the linoleum was missing on the majority of the kitchen-dining room floor. The TV, however, was a big, costly widescreen, hooked up to cable, of course.

I also visited another person not long ago who lived in a total wreck of a house complete with tarp on the roof. She had been approached by organizations and companies to fix the roof, using government money, but she "just couldn't get it together" to follow through.

In the past I have also spoken to homeless people, asking them why they don't take advantage of programs to help themselves. A number of them stated that they would rather live on the streets than "go to the hassle." I also made the mistake of allowing a homeless person to stay with me for a few days. Apparently, you can take the homeless person off the streets, but you can't take the street out of the homeless person. I gave this guy a beautiful wool coat someone had left at my home. That afternoon he came home with it absolutely filthy - he'd been dumpster diving in it.

In many parts of the U.S., with its extraordinary abundance, there is little excuse for living like these folks. It is obvious that laziness and lack of self-examination play a big role.