Shadow Casting

Two items from Utah tonight.

Mormons are assholes? Who knew?

The first is a surveillance video of the arrest in Salt Lake City where the two guys kissed on mormonoid property.

Of course, the property only belongs to the church due to some shady Utah politics, and there is a public easement on the property. The easement means that the arrest should not have happened in the first place. The district attorney obviously agrees since he dropped the trespassing charges against the men.

Growing up in Utah, I am accustomed to the depths of assholeness to which the mormon church can descend. It is nice to see the rest of the world waking up to it as well.

Kid steals car to avoid church

And another story about a seven year old kid who stole a car to escape going to church. This one took place in the county I grew up in.

Utah boy, 7, goes for spin to avoid church and 7-Year-Old is Smartest Child in History

Keep trying kid. I got out, you can too.

The dark ages return

Christians are not known for being tolerant or accepting of anyone who is not just like they are. After two thousand years of violence, history does not tend to show them in a good light.

Now, some christians are upset about this very fact. Greek Orthodox Christians object to exposure of their past acts of vandalism.

I know. Maybe christians could use this opportunity to learn from their mistakes.

Then again. Maybe not.

Censored or Vandalized? Nude Angel Covered Up at French Cathedral

Normal is overrated, boring, and stupid

A must read article on why it’s good to be a freak. Wouldn’t it be great to live in a world that isn’t chock full of conformist assholes.

Singularly Bizarre: A revelation and a manifesto

I found an article about a meeting of European catholic bishops,

European bishops discuss priesthood, euthanasia, gay adoption

One thing I learned here is that this is the “Year of the Priest“. Apparently, next year will be the “Year of the Altar Boy” followed by the “Year of the Cover Up“, the “Year of the Scandal“, the “Year of the Lawsuit“, and the many “Years of Counseling” for the aforementioned altar boys.

But, let’s talk about gay adoption. Apparently, this issue is reaching critical mass for the catholic church because of the many countries that now allow gay marriage. Even in the USA which is lagging behind Europe, the refusal of catholic adoption agencies to recognize gay couples has made headlines for a while now.

Of course, the church claims that allowing gay couples to adopt is in conflict with the church’s teachings on homosexuality. Rather than violate these teachings, some catholic adoption agencies are simply calling it quits.

Consider this quote from the bishop of Lancaster, Patrick O’Donoghue,

On grounds of conscience, formed by faith, we believe that same-sex partnerships do not provide the essential characteristics necessary for the well-being and development of the child. I remain convinced that the best interests of children are served when they live with and are brought up by a married couple. Any dilution of this fundamental principle can harm children and undermine their paramount place in the whole question of adoption. Bishop gives ultimatum to agency over gay adoption

Of course, the catholic church is expecting all of us to feel sorry for them. They are complaining about religious discrimination, and lamenting all of the good deeds that will now remain undone without their help.

We just want to help the children, they say, but now we cannot because of those evil queers. There is simply no way that we can disregard the teachings of the church. We must uphold the church’s beliefs about homosexuality and the nature of the family at all costs.

Yeah, right.

How about we examine another catholic belief, and see how it is followed.

Kidnapping children for the glory of christ

A good place to start may be with the story of Edgardo Mortara. This story is documented in the book The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara by David I. Kertzer. Edgardo’s story is also discussed by Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion

You can also find an excellent article at Marc Alan Di Martino’s blog which gives some extra background on this story.

Richard Dawkins refers to the Edgardo Mortara story to illustrate the deleterious effect that religious dogma can have on a child, but I would like to use this story to illustrate a different point. If you are not familiar with the story, here is some background.

In 1858 Edgardo Mortara was taken away from his parents. Edgardo was the child of Jewish parents who had been secretly baptized by an illiterate servant girl. Once baptized, he became the property of the catholic church, and he was seized by the papal police to be brought up as a roman catholic. He was never reunited with his parents.

To quote from Richard Dawkins,

It was a central part of the Roman Catholic belief-system that, once a child had been baptized, however informally and clandestinely, that child was irrevocably transformed into a Christian. In their mental world, to allow a “Christian child” to stay with his Jewish parents was not an option.

I imagine you are wondering how this relates to gay adoptions. Allow me to start by asking a simple question. Do catholic adoption agencies discriminate against prospective parents on the basis of religion? For instance, would catholic adoption agencies now allow a Jewish couple to adopt a child?

To answer this question, I visited a few websites for catholic adoption agencies. I also downloaded the information packet from the Catholic Charities of Baltimore website. The information packet specifically says that “Catholic Charities has no religious requirements.” From this statement, it certainly appears that a catholic adoption agency would allow children to be placed with Jewish parents. They may even allow atheists.

As you can see from this statement, things have certainly changed since Edgardo Mortara’s time. However, one thing that has not changed is the church’s teaching about the primacy of the catholic church. A teaching that pope Ratzinger has consistently reaffirmed.

For instance, consider this headline from USA Today, Pope: Other Christians not true churches. You may also want to read a document issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which Ratzinger used to run before he got to wear the fancy hats. RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH.

Apparently, the church likes to assert it’s authority in these matters by using the Caps Lock key. Here is a quote,

Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted.

If other christian churches are not as good as the catholic church, you can imagine that non-christian religions such as judaism or buddhism are ranked even lower on the church’s list. As for judaism, pope Ratzinger has expanded the use of the Tridentine Mass which contains a prayer asking that the Jews be delivered from their darkness.

And the point of all this is?

In the past, the catholic church was able to enforce the teachings about the primacy of the church using civil laws that could remove children from their parents. Little more than a century ago, catholics would have been shocked and outraged by a catholic adoption agency that allowed children to be given to Jewish parents. Such an agency would never have existed in countries controlled by the church.

The catholic doctrine on the primacy of the catholic church as the instrument of salvation has not changed despite the number of liberal catholics who desire otherwise. What has changed is western society. Modern societies would not tolerate a religious adoption agency that discriminated against members of another religion. In fact, for many countries such discrimination would be illegal and unpopular.

In these countries, catholic adoption agencies actively ignore doctrines that would have been emphasized in the past. These agencies have adapted to modern society by providing services without regard to the religious beliefs of the adoptive parents. The church still teaches that these other religions are lacking compared to the catholic church, but this teaching does not stand in the way of catholic adoption agencies.

Why do these agencies not take the same approach to gay adoptions?

Catholic agencies are closing rather than perform a gay adoption. Sure the church teaches that homosexuality is wrong, but it also teaches that other religions are wrong. If catholic agencies can give children to parents that practice the wrong religion, why can they not give children to parents who are gay?

It seems a little hypocritical to me.

Watch the story of Bryce Faulkner. His parents have sent him to an ex-gay ministry to be cured of his homosexual tendencies. He has been completely cut off from his boyfriend and friends.

Now, it seems, his parents are threatening legal action. Parents of ‘ex-gay’ student threaten lawsuits

For more info, you can go to these sites.

10JUL09: AN URGENT APPEAL FOR HELP -- SAVE BRYCE FAULKNER!

HELP SAVE BRYCE FAULKNER!

More Updates

July 22, Why isn’t Bryce Faulkner speaking for himself?

July 23, ‘Missing’ Man Sought by Gay Pal Is Willingly Undergoing Counseling, Family Says

Not sure where this came from.

I was reading the Stop Transphobia blog when I came across this statement.

In some quarters there is entrenched homophobia and transphobia within some (but not most) faith communities. There is, however, a problem within the LGBT community that quite unacceptable anti-religous views are tolerated. Both sides of the divide need to grow up, not just one side.
Faith, Homophobia, Transphobia and Human Rights

Someone else left a comment wondering how a “religiophobic” trans-women could be so discriminatory toward religious people.

I meant to leave a small comment myself expressing my disappointment with the paragraph and comment when things got out of hand. The comment came from nowhere and just kept growing as it seemed to write itself. When it was finished, I realized that I had just summed up my reasons for starting this blog, so I decided to reprint the comment here.

By the way, I highly recommend the Stop Transphobia blog. You should check it out.

My response

The fact that you think of both sides as simply being childish shows that you do not take religion seriously. Many people on the religion side of the issue firmly believe that the creator of the universe has dictated that homosexuality is a sin.

The fact that they hold this belief without a shred of evidence, or that they strongly promote this belief while completely ignoring other parts of their religion, does not change the strength of that conviction.

On the other side, atheists such as myself see religion as a danger for precisely that reason. When you no longer require a conviction to be subject to reason or common sense, that conviction can be the source of dangerous actions. The stronger the conviction, the more dangerous it can become.

I personally have no doubt that the men who flew the airplanes into the buildings on 9/11 honestly believed that they were following god’s will. Many commentators in the media patronizingly suggested every other cause for their actions such as poverty and discrimination while ignoring the religious justification that the hijackers themselves gave for their actions.

Religion in America has often been the source of violence and hatred. The bible contains passages which justify slavery and the subjugation of women. While many christians now choose to ignore these passages, there will always be some who strongly believe that god demands that such passages be followed.

Christianity as a whole has been opposed to major medical advances that relieve suffering, freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and freedom of association. In addition, the most progressive societies are ones in which religion has little to no role.

Being an atheist does not make me discriminatory. I strongly hold that those freedoms are fundamental to a just society. I would never advocate that someone lose their job because of their beliefs, or be threatened, harassed, fined, or imprisoned.

I will, however, hold their beliefs up to the light of reason. I will encourage them to leave their stone age ideologies and superstitions behind in order to promote a civilized society. A society that respects human freedom rather than passing unjust laws based on strong beliefs that have no evidence to support them.

It is not childish to discourage ideas that you think are dangerous by engaging in public debate.

Here is a another article on the incident in Utah where the two guys were harassed and arrested for kissing on mormon church property. This one is from the Salt Lake Tribune.

Gay incident reopens Salt Lake City’s Main Street plaza wounds

This article says some things that I just had to comment on. Although, my comments here have little to do with the kissing incident. See Utah still sucks for more on that.

Here is the first quote,

Mormons don’t want to be vilified as anti-gay for “honoring” their beliefs about marriage.

I have seen a few articles since the passage of Prop 8 in California where mormons are whining about the “backlash” that has occurred, and I am tired of hearing them complain. Mormons are not being vilified for their “beliefs” about marriage.

Mormons are being vilified for systematically working to pass laws which trample on the fundamental human rights of an entire group of people. The mormon church is perfectly free to teach that it is wrong to be gay. They are also free to deny a temple marriage to a gay couple, and they are certainly free to “believe” whatever they want.

Everyone is free to decide that they do not like a group of people for whatever reason. However, there is a huge difference between disliking someone and working to strip them of basic human rights. Actively working to discriminate against someone is an act of hatred.

Mormons and other religious groups think that they can act in such a hateful way toward other people only to act surprised when they find that those people do not like them. They demonstrate intolerance on a daily basis, then act surprised when people think they are intolerant.

Religious Discrimination

There was a time in this country when it was illegal to be a member of various religions. For instance, Massachusetts banished quakers, and Virginia enacted anti-Quaker laws that could include the death penalty. Virginia also passed laws against the baptists and presbyterians.

Many christians have engaged in religious persecution against other christians because of their belief that these other christians were somehow perverting the christian religion. In America, however, people came to realize that there is a huge difference between disagreeing with another religion and actively seeking to discriminate against them by creating evil laws.

These persecutions eventually led to the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and the first amendment to the constitution as people realized the evil of religious discrimination.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

In America, religious people still disagree after two hundred years. Some christian sects still teach that other christians are going to hell, and they are perfectly free to believe it. Just as the mormons are free to believe that homosexuality is a sin.

As with religious discrimination, however, people need to keep their personal beliefs from being turned into an unjust law.

Indoctrinated to hate

Here is the other quote from the Salt Lake Tribune article that I just had to comment on.

“The LDS Church responds very effectively to very overt cases of human pain and suffering,” such as Hurricane Katrina or poverty in Africa, Goldsmith says. “For some reason, they just don’t see the pain and suffering of people right here on their very doorsteps, people who are prevented from having their civil rights honored, their human integrity honored.”

I can tell you the reason. The mormon church does not see gay people as being fully human.

Whenever you want someone to actively hate a group of people, the first thing you do is dehumanize that group. When people have been indoctrinated by an ideology that dehumanizes someone else, it becomes remarkably easy to ignore the suffering that they cause to that group of people.

However, there are many other people in this country who do know that gay people are human beings. Human beings who deserve the same basic rights as everyone else.

These people can see the hateful and discriminatory acts of the mormon church for what they are, and we will continue to call them out on it.

Bill Maher on a religious test for office.

Bill Maher on the pope.

Falling down catholics

Well, the pope had a fall and broke his wrist. The first I heard about this event was on twitter from @tjboudreaux who asked the question, “Would you be humble enough to wait in line in an emergency room, if you had the authority of the pope?“, with a link to a Whispers in the Loggia article.

When I looked up the story, I came across this site, Pope Benedict XVI Has Surgery for Broken Wrist, which says that he broke his wrist “due to a fall at his Alpine vacation chalet“. I am not sure about the emergency room, but I do think I could be humble enough to own an Alpine vacation chalet.

I wonder if it has an “eye of a needle” for the pope to pass through while on vacation.

Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
Matthew 19:24

We demand a miracle

I then saw the tweet from @BibleAlsoSays which asks “The Pope broke his wrist and underwent surgery? Why didn’t he just pray for healing? If it doesn’t work for the Pope who does it work for?“.

Which does bring up a good point. If the pope is the modern day equivalent of St. Peter why do we never see him heal the sick? For instance, consider the following passages.

Now Peter and John were going up to the temple area for the three o’clock hour of prayer. And a man crippled from birth was carried and placed at the gate of the temple called “the Beautiful Gate” every day to beg for alms from the people who entered the temple. When he saw Peter and John about to go into the temple, he asked for alms. But Peter looked intently at him, as did John, and said, “Look at us.” He paid attention to them, expecting to receive something from them. Acts 3:1-5

Peter said, “I have neither silver nor gold, but what I do have I give you: in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazorean, (rise and) walk.” Then Peter took him by the right hand and raised him up, and immediately his feet and ankles grew strong. He leaped up, stood, and walked around, and went into the temple with them, walking and jumping and praising God. Acts 3:6-9

If that one is not fantastic enough for you, how about this one.

Now in Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha (which translated means Dorcas). She was completely occupied with good deeds and almsgiving. Now during those days she fell sick and died, so after washing her, they laid (her) out in a room upstairs. Since Lydda was near Joppa, the disciples, hearing that Peter was there, sent two men to him with the request, “Please come to us without delay.” So Peter got up and went with them. When he arrived, they took him to the room upstairs where all the widows came to him weeping and showing him the tunics and cloaks that Dorcas had made while she was with them. Acts 9:36-39

Peter sent them all out and knelt down and prayed. Then he turned to her body and said, “Tabitha, rise up.” She opened her eyes, saw Peter, and sat up. He gave her his hand and raised her up, and when he had called the holy ones and the widows, he presented her alive. This became known all over Joppa, and many came to believe in the Lord. Acts 9:40-42

From reading the “new testement“, you get the impression that miracles were a daily occurrence, and these miracles were being performed by the apostles. The catholic church claims that the modern day bishops can trace their authority in a direct line back to the first set of twelve apostles, and that the authority of the pope comes directly from Peter himself.

Why no miracles then?

Some people would say that it is prideful on our part to demand miracles from god before we are willing to believe. Yet, god used miracles throughout the book of Acts as the primary means of converting people to the infant church.

The catholic church is always complaining about the rise of secularism and the decline of faith. We now have much better methods to analyze a miracle to prove that it is real. We also have much better methods to spread the news of a miracle, so it seems like a miracle or two may just be the way to go.

But there is no hurry. I am sure that we can wait for the pope’s wrist to heal before he starts to bring dead people back to life.

Hey, if the pope only brings back dead catholics, he could have his own zombie army. The atheists would really be in trouble then.

This is a great video. Professor Richard Dawkins explains why there are still chimpanzees.

The sad thing is that most people should know this stuff by the time they get to high school, but the religious conservatives have managed to dumb down the science textbooks to the point of being useless. At least for those of us in the USA.

Something that I have wondered about is how all of the christian apologists are dealing with the advances in the field of genetics. For the most part, they seem to be ignoring it.

In the past, scientists had to determine how closely two species were related by looking at structural similarities. However, mutations occur at the genetic level in the DNA.

How a given genetic mutation expresses itself as a noticeable structural difference in a species is extremely complex. In fact, a genetic mutation may not show up at all as a structural difference.

Fortunately, scientists have made great progress in sequencing the genome of humans and other animals.

Now, instead of comparing outward structural characteristics, scientists can compare the actual DNA between different species to determine how closely they are related. And the amount of data available to scientists is greatly increasing as the technology to sequence DNA improves.

For instance, consider this article, Sequencing a Genome a Week, which has the following quote:

The Human Genome Project took 13 years to fully sequence a single human’s genetic information. At Washington University’s Genome Center, they can now do one in a week.

A few years ago, a study came out that said humans and chimpanzees have more than 98% of their DNA in common. Some later studies showed that the number was more like 95%.

These idiots seem to think this means that evolution is wrong, and the bible is true.

It is hard to see how they can be happy about a study that shows that humans and chimps share 95% of their DNA. Whether it is 95% or 98% percent, it still means that humans and chimps are pretty closely related.

It would be one thing if the DNA evidence contradicted all of the other evidence that we have instead of supporting it.

What I always find annoying is how religious people will embrace many technologies while rejecting the underlying science.

As more DNA evidence comes in, I have no doubt that many christians will argue against it. Yet, these same people will accept things like using genetic evidence in criminal cases or paternity suits.

I am also sure they will also accept any medical breakthroughs that occur from these technologies. Unless the breakthroughs involve stem cell research or contraception, of course.

Like many christians, the “Answers in Genesis” people probably do not accept carbon dating of fossils which means they essentially deny quantum mechanics. Yet, they have a website.

Websites run on computers which use solid state electronics. Our understanding of solid state electronics is based pretty heavily on, you guessed it, quantum mechanics.

The mormons already had a problem when a huge genetic study of native americans found that they are not jewish. But, how can that be? That would mean the book of mormon is wrong.

Not to worry. You are still free to accept the book of mormon as true due to the indegestion, I mean “Burning in the Bosom“, that you felt when you prayed about it. How can a mountain of evidence compare to that?

Of course, if you really want to see what can happen when people with stone age ideologies are presented with modern technology, you need look no further than 911.

I am afraid that all of the evidence in the world may be no match for human stupidity.