What I hate about [CENSORED]

You've all heard about [CENSORED] before, and most of you have probably thought the same thing. A lot of people have tried to call out the followers of [CENSORED], only to be met with death threats (and occasionally, those threats have been acted upon.) People have been censored for even trying to talk about [CENSORED] without actually talking about it. Don't even think about talking about [CENSORED]'s prophet, The Prophet [CENSORED], may [CENSORED] be upon [CENSORED]. To quote an extremist [CENSORED] website on the subject; "You could end up dead."

This post isn't going to be about the specific things within the religion that I hate. I'm not going to talk about how the Prophet [CENSORED] was a child molester and a violent psychopath without a single redeeming quality. I'm not going to talk about how [CENSORED]'s followers belong to an incredibly violent, backwards civilization which has slowly but surely stripped themseves of all respect in the eyes of the global community through their own actions. I'm not going to write more than a few words about how any faith that supports violence against anybody has no place in the world today. I've read through the the [CENSORED], their holy book.

“When you meet the unbelievers, strike off their heads; then when you have made wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives”

"When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them."

It should be noted that quotes like this are plentiful within the [CENSORED], but most of them mention [CENSORED] or the Prophet [CENSORED], and I didn't want to take the value of the quote away by pasting my little "[CENSORED]" in there. Any time I've seen quotes like these brought up in discussion, there are two replies. One type of reply brings up other quotes from the [CENSORED] that call against violence, saying things like "[CENSORED] is with those who restrain themselves." The second type of reply is basically "Take this down now!" or "You deserve to die!" [CENSORED], right? Yeah, fuck [CENSORED].

To the former group, while I applaud you on arguing on a level fitting the 21st century, I don't need to point out that your holy [CENSORED] calls for violence against non believers, and for restraint against fellow [CENSORED]s. I'm a non believer, an infidel, and your [CENSORED] says to kill me. I take issue with that. To the latter group, you are the face and the voice of your religion. As the loudest, the angriest, and the craziest fucking [CENSORED]s out there, you are what non-[CENSORED]s see, hear, and think about whenever [CENSORED] or the Prophet [CENSORED] is brought up. Congratulations, you're destroying your own religion.


Wait, didn't I say I wasn't going to talk about the [CENSORED] religion itself... right. Oops! I'm not going to mention any of those things beyond this point because I think that anybody reading this already knows it. Fuck [CENSORED].

What I want to talk about is how [CENSORED] has been treated by the media. How buckling to the demands of a small radical bunch of [CENSORED] morons not only destroys what we believe in as far as free speech, but it also promotes the kind of hateful filth that [CENSORED] militants scream about. Every time we censor the word [CENSORED], or refuse to mention the Prophet [CENSORED], we slowly but surely give them ground. These violent [CENSORED]s see it happen, and they see themselves winning a battle that shouldn't exist in the first place. The western world, with all of it's freedoms and all of it's strength, bullied into submission by a group of idiotic blind [CENSORED] followers.

People are following suit, though. It seems that this type of censorship is making headlines more and more often. The [CENSORED]s are learning that with a few threats, they can get whatever they want. The more we cave into these rediculous threats, the greater the rift between our two cultures becomes. We say something about [CENSORED], [CENSORED]s demand that it be removed, we remove it. Their children see us apologize and believe that we're afraid. Our children see them threaten us and believe that they're dangerous. I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I certainly missed the part of the Charter (Or the Constitution) under Freedom of Speech that said (Except for [CENSORED]).

Once we've agreed that [CENSORED] is not available for discussion, that the Prophet [CENSORED] should never be mentioned, where do we stop? Will [CENSORED]s and [CENSORED]s demand the same treatment? Will [CENSORED]s threaten violence if we mention the crucifiction of [CENSORED]? What about [CENSORED]? I'll bet [CENSORED] will be unavailable for comment while his lawyers sue [CENSORED] into [CENSORED] for mentioning [CENSORED]. People with [CENSORED]s will start asking for [CENSORED] too, because something offended [CENSORED] and they [CENSORED] want to look different. [CENSORED], what's happening to [CENSORED], are we really doing [CENSORED]? Is it so [CENSORED] to give in on [CENSORED] one small issue, so that we don't sacrifice [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED]. Or am I just [CENSORED]?

Man, fuck Islam.

Arrest the Pope!

Most people, with regards to the Pope, probably believe he's a pretty good guy. After all, he's the Pope, right? Such a position within the church surely demands a benevolent person with a high personal moral standard! No Pope in history could ever have done anything wrong, many of them are now Saints themselves! I mean, it's not as though we have records of political murders, church funded wars, the spanish inquistion, the genocide of non-conformist christian sects, deals with and support for the Nazis, complete denial of the holocaust, or the excommunication of "sexual deviants," including pregnant teens, homosexuals, and even rape victims seeking an abortion.... right? That's all just silly-talk.

Oh, wait. Oops.

Thomas Ratzinger, the man we call Pope Benedict XVI has left a new stain on the record of the catholic church to be added to that list. I've brought this up with a few friends from time to time, and the reaction is always the same - "I don't know if I believe that." This is always what they say. So, in an attempt to quell any doubts that may be floating around out there that this actually happened, I've provided links! Beautiful, glorious links! Included are a documentary produced by BBC, several news articles, and even the actual document written by Ratzinger himself.

A BBC documentary on the subject:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Here are a few articles further describing the Pope's involvement:
The London Standard
Guardian.co.uk
BSAlert.com
BBC.com
ABC News
Dialog International

This is a link to the document itself, provided by The Guardian.
The Vatican Document written by Ratzinger

And finally, a move to have the Pope arrested and charged: CNSNews.com

Now, while I personally support the move to have Ratzinger arrested and tried for his crimes, I don't think it's going to work out. I think that his diplomatic immunity as the head of a sovereign nation will get him off the hook. I don't think he'll spend a single day in prison, and I don't think he'll ever be forced to pay for what he's done.

I do, however, think that all of the disgusting skeletons in this man's closet will be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the light. I think that this will, at the very least, bring this pile of inhuman filth and his crimes to the eyes and ears of all of his followers, supporters, and faithful subjects all over the world. I think that at least some of the people who hear about it will have the common sense to think, "I will never support a system like that ever again." And I think that the fewer supporters a corrupt, immoral system like this has, the better.

Baby steps.

Religiots!

It's been a couple months since I've posted anything, and it feels like forever. I intend to start adding stuff to the blog regularily again, lately I've been unable to do so due to medical issues.

I've been fighting cancer, actually. Testicular cancer. It's not the kind of thing that you want to start making funeral arrangements over - 99% of the time it's treatable - but it was still a stressful time.

Throughout the entire ordeal, I've had numerous people say things like
"Thank God it wasn't worse!"
or...
"Someone's looking out for you!"
I've always just laughed and nodded, said something like
"Yeah, I guess so."
These people are trying to offer sympathy or condolences, you can't go on telling them
"Actually, you can't evaluate the existence of God on a case-by-case basis, what about the thousands of people who die from cancer every year?"
No, you can't tell them that. That would be rude.

That's it for now, but I'll be posting on a weekly basis again from here on out.
(For real this time.)

On the Subject of Hate Crimes...

After reading this article, I've been pretty angry. The story talks about the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, an act working to include violent crimes committed based on someone's sexual orientation to be added to the list of hate-crimes in the states. Matthew Shepard was a man in Wyoming who was tied to a fencepost and beaten to death because he was gay - the bill is named after him. Good idea, right? I think we can all agree that tying anyone to a post and beating them to death is generally a dick move, and doing so because of their nationality, gender, race, or sexual orientation is most definitely a hate crime, right? Can we all agree on that?

No, we can't, apparently.

A christian group in the states is claiming that new hate crime legislation is "an effort to eradicate religious beliefs opposing the homosexual agenda from the marketplace of ideas by demonizing, vilifying, and criminalizing such beliefs as a matter of federal law and policy."

Agenda? What? Did I miss something? Is there a greater plan involved here, is the gay community meeting in secret - planning something? Does it involve short-shorts or assless chaps? Saying something like "the homosexual agenda," in my opinion, is tantamount to saying "I'm a big moron, and nobody should ever listen to me." It's an absolutely rediculous statement, and there aren't enough words in the english language to describe the baffling ignorance behind it.

The group believes that because their religion says that it's A-O-K to hate homosexuality, that any bill opposing that belief is an attack on the religion itself.

They're idiots. There's really no other way I can put it, they're idiots. Most people who read about them will probably come to the same conclusion; theists and atheists, hetero and homosexual alike.

What really gets to me in situations like this, however, are the "moderates," the people who say things like "That's not how Christianity is." The fact is, this is exactly how your religion is. These people are in the spotlight, talking about all the dirty little secrets involved in your religion, preaching it to the masses.

You can try to sugar-coat it, and say that it's not part of what you believe, but it's there. It's part of the faith, part of the religion that you endorse - that you hold up. The radicals and the crazies are screaming hate and vitriol at the top of their lungs, and they're doing so while riding on your backs. By supporting their religion, you are inadvertently supporting them.

Aaaaaaand /end rant.

Earthquake! Quick! Grab the SuperBible!

Unless you've been in a coma for the past couple weeks, you've heard about the devastation in Haiti. The haitians are dying, starving, living outdoors, struggling from day to day. Oh, and there was an earthquake that made all of that shit even worse. Over a hundred thousand people have died, people are missing, the country is in ruins. Haiti was already the poorest country in the western hemisphere, so seeing them hit with a natural disaster of this magnitude is frustratingly heartbreaking.

The aid they're receiving, however, is incredible. Money and manpower are flowing in from quite literally all over the globe, it's looking like people have really come together in the wake of this disaster to lend a helping hand. Through something as simple as a text message it's possible to donate money to the cause, and the reaction to this system from the public is phenomenal.

There are, of course, these types of people.

Oh, so... the earthquake... was punishment? Did I understand him correctly? I mean, he's saying that the Haitian people "made a deal with the devil," so they've been cursed.

I don't think I need to explain why Robertson is a douche.

The moronic radical rants of a senile psychopath aside, (say that ten times, fast) I also read about this, and it had my teeth grinding. A group of Religiots in Albuquerque have decided that it'd be a good idea to send Solar-powered Super-bibles to the Haitians. They're saying that these Holy Gadgets will bring "hope and comfort that comes from knowing God has not forgotten them through this tragedy." I know I'm not the only one thinking it, but I'll write it out anyway.

So, if there's a god, and he's watching out for us because he loves us, cares for us, and wants us to be happy - why did he decide to grab haiti and shake the shit out of it, murdering 100,000 people?

Now, as for this religious group "Faith Comes by Hearing," if you want to help Haiti out, that's cool. I've got an idea - I just thought of it right now, actually, it's kinda neat. You can take my idea if you want. It's alright, I don't mind. I mean, it might not even be my idea, someone else may have had it before me.

SEND THEM SOME FUCKING MONEY!

Solar powered bibles aren't going to pull their families out from underneath the rubble. Prayer isn't going to feed them. Faith isn't going to bring them clean water, and hope doesn't build new homes. Take the money you spent on those Brain-Wash-O-Matics and give that to them instead.

Thanks for your time.







Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?
-Epicurus

Child Abuse

Today I'd like to touch on a story I read out of New Jersey. It's a strong belief of mine that teaching children religious values is borderline child abuse, however this story steps beyond that line. Stories like this are emerging with ever increasing regularity, and it seems that each time the parents in question are almost striving to set the proverbial bar on "crazy" even higher. This woman, however, is apparently not crazy. After psychiatric testing, she was deemed competent to stand trial. Devout, yes - psychotic, no. I wonder parents in other cases like this would test.

For a brief recap of the story itself, a New Jersey woman named Estelle Walker moved into a church retreat cabin with her five children. Her reason for doing so at the time was to escape her estranged husband's alleged alcoholism. She was broke, and unemployed. They stayed there for about one year, and for the last three months that they were in the cabin she apparently made no attempt to feed the kids. They would go days at a time without eating - the longest streak being eleven straight days. Walker said that "God would provide" them with food. By the time the police were called in the kids "were so malnourished they had difficulty talking." This was three years ago, and Walker's trial is set to resume on Tuesday.

Most people who read this article will see it at face value; one crazy lady neglecting her kids because of her blind, irrational faith. The religious people I know would never do this, they're intelligent, (sometimes even rational :D ) human beings. In my opinion, however, this article cannot be taken at face value. This is one of many radical fundamentalists, people who take the idea of faith or religion entirely too far, and they do so while riding on the backs of the moderates. She'll use her faith as a shield, and "God as her defense," and I can guarantee you right now - there will be other fundamentalists who will stand up for her, other religious people who see her plight as admirable.

In my opinion, she should be locked away. Throw away the key and never look back. After all, God will provide her with all the food and company she needs, right?