Voting: The S & M way

(Inspired by the idea of PUMA, and by people wondering why African Americans are so disproportionately Democrats...)

It is a remarkable problem that has become increasingly obvious over the last few years. Closeted gay politicians pass anti-gay legislation. Post-equal rights women speak publicly about the evils of feminism. Pundits from a minority group rant about how we should do away with the overcompensatory measures of affirmative action. And those in bottom quintile for yearly salary speak out against welfare and "socialism". These are a vast and varied group of people who, for whatever reason, fight valiantly on behalf of a group that is against their own best interests. They are the Stockholm Republicans.

They may see it as a noble sacrifice, or they may simply focus on aspects of neo-conservative policy that doesn't pertain to stripping them of their rights. But, for whatever reason, they find themselves supporting the people who hate them and want to limit their existence as much as possible. They are racial minorities who ally themselves with racists (e.g. D'Souza). They are women who are willing to sacrifice their rights to choice (in regards to womb and work) in the name of tradition (e.g. Schafly). They are non-Christians supporting the claim that they live in a Christian country and that the legislature should feel free to impose fundamentalist views on the general populace. They are gays who support the party that is bastion of hope for homophobes across the country. Their motives are unknown, but, whether or not they are consciously aware of the fact that they are adamantly supporting their own oppression, or if they merely see it as a necessary evil in favoring an otherwise agreeable platform (from their perspective) is up for debate on a case by case basis.

Nevertheless, I think it safe to assume that they have a masochistic streak (especially in light of seeing how well Republicans do on the economic and military fronts, and not just the social one). Whether they should be pitied as victims of two-party circumstance, hailed as martyrs for an indeterminate cause, or hauled off to a mental facility, their existence is a striking blow to our political system. Under circumstances without such a group, the Republicans couldn't afford to remain as the "rich Christian white straight male's party" and let the Democratic party be the "everybody else's party". They would lose every election. But, the group of Stockholm Republicans (be they "followers of the status-quo", those who hear the party platform and say"one out of five ain't bad", or the "optimistic ear-pluggers") effectively innoculate the party from such a threat, and assure that they never have to abandon their lack of concern about society beyond the original core "panderees".

I have my fingers crossed that they are too small of a fringe to matter in this election (where the past administration should have thoroughly dismissed any illusions of conservative fiscal responsibility, moral superiority, and military expertise). But, then again, you will be surprised how many people are willing to take up the brutal four more years of the self-flagellation they know, than the black, inexperienced secret Muslim that they don't.

On Palin, pregnancy, and PUMA

Point one: McCain deciding to choose Palin as his Vice Presidential candidate was bold, risky, brilliant, but probably an incredible sacrifice. By choosing Palin, he can now claim a historic ticket just like Obama, and gain some leverage with jilted Hillary supporters who were leaning towards the Republican side and now may be willing to make that leap. And, with Palin having a big, wholesome family and being strongly religious, she can help to give a little more balance to McCain, who is still mistrusted by evangelicals for speaking out against them in his maverick days (though they aren't as skeptical of him as they should be, predictably). Of course, this comes at the risk of being too transparent of a ploy to get women voters on to the Republican side, chasing them away, while simultaneously chasing away the "barefoot and pregnant" brand of misogynists on the far right. At the same time, she may seem to be immune to being challenged for inexperience due to Obama having the same problem, her presence effectively makes it so that challenging Obama's inexperience is a moot point now. The tickets are balanced both in regards to experience and their historical nature.

Point two: Palin's daughter is pregnant apparently. And there is much conflict amongst the Democrats (surprise) about whether or not this issue should be addressed. I am a big supporter of not bringing up the sex lives of candidates, or about bringing up the candidates' families at all. We are not electing their family, after all. But, I am conflicted on this, since I am in favor of mentioning something that illustrates failures in a candidate's policies or outright hypocrisy. I am not sure if it applies here, but there is a definitely a double standard. I do think that unless we have a relevant reason for dragging the issue into the public eye further, that we should do as Obama suggests and take the high road. Most arguments I have heard for why Palin's views could be relevant to her daughter's teenage pregnancy have to do with assuming that abstinence only education was at fault and the fact that she applauded her daughter for making a choice (keeping the child) that she wishes to deprive others from making. Other than that, which are kind of weak as it is, there is really no good reason to bring it up and we should leave it alone.

Point three: Former Hillary supporters (alluded to in point one) who are willing to either forfeit votes or vote for McCain to spite Obama seem to be rather vocal on the net. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are any more relevant to the electoral process overall than the equally net-frenzied Ron Paul supporters of yestermonth, but they still seem to have a lot of presence. Some seem to be dwelling on some perceived misogyny in some of the remarks made in media coverage (the only one I can think of us is the idiotic manner that they covered her crying spell after winning one of the early primaries, but I am sure there were other instances, as there usually is). Or they may be reacting to particularly abrasive Obama supporters online (I know, someone said something rude and inconsiderate online!) or in real life. [Side note: they are also dismissed as some form of cultist if they are not able to give a good reason for why they are voting for Obama. Just FYI.] Others seem to still just be peeved about Hillary not being allowed to get votes from the two states that were discounted at the very beginning of the primary season, according to rules that were agreed to beforehand. And still more just plain don't like Obama (claiming that he is sexist, though I am not sure why, to be honest).
I honestly don't know whether these people are actually sincere Democrats, or just cross-overs who are crossing back now that Hillary has fallen out. But still, the ones that claim to be pissed off Democrats seem to be put into a state where they think it is detestable that people would expect them to vote for Obama instead of Hillary now that he was won the nomination, due to the fact that he is the one who shares the most in common with their former "messiah" (turnabout is fair play, no?). They deplore the idea of "party unity" because they argue that it is commanding them to vote a certain way, feel as if they are victimized due to Hillary losing, etc. etc.
I sincerely hope that there are not many of these people. This is a very important election, and we do not need to have the Democrats lose once again, and due to a bunch of disgruntled voters who are willing to vote for someone they disagree with on almost every issue out of pure spite. I send out a prayer that this will not occur. As an atheist....that should serve as a testament to my desperation.

On truth, Truth, truf, and TROOF.

truth: An accurate assessment of reality; something that isn't false; a claim that is supported by, or consistent with, the facts. Factuality; actuality.

Truth: That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence. Often used inappropriately in place of the word "TROOF".

truf: Informal phrase that means "that is the truth", or simply "truth"; petinent to irrelevant, trivial, and insignificant matters only. Statements that could be called "truf" either are personal to the point of being irrelevant to anyone but the persons directly involved in the matter, or are otherwise obvious claims that do not advance a line of reasoning, and are often used for deceptive, manipulative purposes beyond the scope of the statement itself. See also: "non-sequitur".

TROOF: [for a lower-case version of the same word, see the definition of the word "truf" for alternate definitions.] A concept, or set of beliefs that is either believed by a sizeable chunk of society or believed with unwavering conviction by a specific individual addressed. The concepts or beliefs relevant are often either factually unsupported or outright falsehoods, but are nonetheless presented as truth or Truth (see above definitions) by those that hold them. The people involved must also present no possible doubts of the veracity of their claims in addition to the above criteria in order for the ideas presented to fit this definition. Bonus points if they are belligerent assholes about it. See also: "faith".

Hovind Scale Links

Definition of the Hovind Scale, and Rating Details
The Hovind Scale is used to rate Creationist statements about the nature of reality and assign a value to how ignorant, scientifically illiterate and / or outright dishonest they are.It is named after the convicted fraudster and Young Earth Creationist Kent Hovind. He is currently serving time because of his "overly flexible" attitude to the truth, and before his incarceration was regularly lying for Jesus.

100 - Utter Hovind - the person might actually BE Hovind (if he has net access from his cell), but if they're not they are certainly talking complete and utter Hovind! Lies and ignorance knowingly combined and asserted as fact! The state of the art of Lying for Jesus.
90-99 - Positively Hovindian - while not managing to be quite as ignorant or mendacious as the master himself, this person still displays positively Hovindian levels of scientific illiteracy and dishonesty
60-89 - VenomFangTastic - not quite up in the fully Kentian levels, as there may be some slightly mitigating circumstances (youth or inexperience for example), but still a person who can be relied on to produce long winded and scientifically illiterate or self-contradictory arguments ex recto at a moment's notice
30-59 - Profoundly Creotarded - This person likely has little or no scientific knowledge, and they are actively Lying for Jesus at every opportunity.
21-30 - Creotarded - A run of the mill Creotard, with a balance of ignorance, illogic and mendacity
12-20 - Partially Creotarded - Some very serious misunderstandings about reality, and a hint of zealotry beginning to rear its ugly head
6-11 - Pushing The Limits of Decency - starting to go beyond what is reasonable, but dishonesty or scientific illiteracy are becoming too obvious to ignore.
1-5 - Surprisingly Decent - a pretty good effort, with a combined honesty / scientific understanding far beyond the typical Creationist zealot. You might well be able to have a sensible discussion with this person. Educated laymen with a genuine desire to explore the issues may well turn up in this category.
0 - The Blue Butterfly Effect - a well constructed and intellectually honest argument, informed by a comprehensive general scientific understanding and in-depth knowledge of the specifics of any relevant scientific work. If you want to debate this person, you'd better know what you're talking about!

Calculating the Hovind Factor Score

"Hovind Factor = (X + s + i + p) x (m + 1)
where:
Belief in scripture - “X”
0 - No doctrinal belief required
1 - Metaphorical use of Biblical/Qu’ranic quotation
2 - Belief in scripture as the infallible word of God. Timeless, inerrant and absolute. (AiG/The flud etc.)
Scientific Illiteracy - “s”
0 - Full understanding of detailed, advanced scientific principles
1 - Overall grasp of principles with some understanding of specific area being discussed
2 - Vague understanding of general principle but with poor grasp of many details
3 - No understanding or knowledge of area being discussed
4 - Rejection of basic scientific facts/laws/robust theories and/or denial of any evidence that contradicts scripture
5 - Ray Comfort (Extreme, moronic and puerile level of 4 above)
The idiocy scale - “i”
0 - no discernible stupidity
1 - slightly silly, but understandable
2 - foolish
3 - daft
4 - rather funny in a slightly worrying sort of way
5 - very funny in a very worrying way
6 - scary stuff
7 - very scary
8 - unlikely to be accepted by anyone with more than two functioning neurons
9 - Moronic. Stark-bollock-naked, off-the-wall, wing-nut
10 - Kirk Cameron or VenomFangX
Paradox - “p”
0 = Statement is logical and self-consistent
1 = Statement acknowledges slight flaw in internal logic but glosses over it with babble.
2 = Statement relies on an assumed divine intervention to explain self contradiction.
3 = Self contradiction invalidates statement completely, and is left unaddressed.
and
Mendacity - “m”
0 - Total honesty
1 - Statement maker knows they are telling enough of a porkie to try to mislead a generally credulous audience
2 - Statement maker knows they are lying enough to try to mislead an educated audience, or they are repeating a lie that they have previously been corrected on.
3 - Whopper! (including plagiarism)
4 - Complete, burn-in-Hell, perjury grade, super-lie - for example, one that is strategically designed to mislead authorities or the general public (e.g. as witnessed in the Dover trial and Expelled).
Using this formula, a completely honest statement of scientific merit would score a Hovind Factor of zero.
The maximum Hovind Factor, HFmax, is a completely insane statement which contradicts all scientific evidence but adheres totally to religious doctrine and which the person making the claim knows to be untrue - while at the same time the statement also completely contradicts itself - would score (2 + 5 + 10 + 3) x (4 + 1) = 100."

Hovind Scale Calculator

(This rating system is truly brilliant! I just wish that truthfulness wasn't weighted so heavily, since, as Poe's law shows clearly, it is really difficult to tell when fundamentalist believers and the anti-science folks are being truthful or not...because it is too insane to decipher. But, it is a nice toy anyway.)

E-mails Say The Darndest Things.

Alright, here are two e-mail strawmen-lists regarding liberal vs. conservative politics taken from America's favorite source of idiocy, bigotry, and outright hilarity! Please, enjoy.

"21 Ways To Be a Good Democrat.
* You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.
* You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
* You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.
* You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.
* You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical documented changes in the Earth’s climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUVs.
* You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.
* You have to believe that AIDS virus is spread by a lack of Federal funding.
* You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach 4 th-graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
* You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.
* You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.
* You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make “The Passion Of The Christ” for financial gain only.
* You have to believe the National Rifle Association (NRA) is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.
* You have to believe that taxes are low, but ATM fees are too high.
* You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem (feminists) are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, General Robert E. Lee, Thomas Edison and Alexander Graham Bell.
* You have to believe that standardized tests are racists, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.
* You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.
* You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried because the right people haven’t been in charge.
* You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and sex offender belonged in the White House.
* You have to believe that homosexual parades display drag, transvestites and beastiality should be Constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
* You have to believe that illegal Democrat Party funding by the communist Chinese Government is somehow in the best interests of the United States.
* You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy."

lulz "beastiality". The folks at FSTDT had quite a few good responses to this. But, here is a related e-mail with a similar theme, except directed at Republicans. I find that it works well enough.

"1. You have to believe that teenagers shouldn't learn about safe sex because ignorance is the best way to prevent pregnancy, and besides, only those homos get AIDS and you thank God for that.
2. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to lead all kids in prayer regardless of their faith as long as it's your faith. 3.You have to believe it is intelligent to buy a gun to protect your family and home despite the fact that you are?40 times more likely to kill your own family member than an intruder.
4.You have to believe that it's OK to have an affair as long as you divorce your spouse after you've been caught and marry the mistress. (Dole, Reagan, Gingrich, Barr,etc.)
5.You have to believe that your SUV should be exempt from emission standards even though it spews out 4 times the pollution of any car, because you enjoy sitting high above the congested traffic.
6. You have to believe abortion is always wrong because all lives are precious and you'll kill any doctor who performs one.
7. You have to believe that the minimum wage should be outlawed because thanks to the extreme generosity of corporations you are overpaid.
8. You have to believe that your children will have a well-rounded education by banning books in the public schools and libraries.
9. You have to believe that in case the government goes bad, you'll need your handgun to successfully fight off an organized army that has tanks, aircraft, battleships, missiles, satellites, and 2 million well-trained soldiers.
10. You have to believe that the NRA is good because it supports a self-serving portion of the Constitution, but the ACLU is bad because it supports all portions of the Constitution, even the right for your fellow Klansmen to have a parade in a Jewish neighborhood.
11. You have to believe that a woman cannot be trusted with decisions about her own body, but that large multinational corporations should make decisions affecting all mankind with no regulation whatsoever.
12. You have to believe that diversity on your presidential ticket means two Texas millionaire oilmen from different corporations.
13. You have to believe the Hate Crimes Bill is bad because it gives "special protection" to a group of people, but think that laws that prohibit citizens from suing Tobacco Corporations, Gun-makers and HMOs are not special protection.
14. You have to believe that freedom of speech is cherished as long as you like what is being said. 15.You have to believe that over the past 20 years, no Presidential primary is complete without the name Dole and/or Bush on it.
16.You have to believe that trickle-down economics works because the rich surely won't keep all that money to themselves.Look how well it worked during the Reagan-Bush years.
17.You have to believe Clinton is bad because he lied about a private sexual indiscretion under oath, but Ronald "I don't remember" Reagan and George "I wasn't there" Bush are heroes because they lied under oath about illegally selling arms to Iranian militants and giving the cash to drug-smuggling Nicaraguan Contras.
18. You have to believe that its OK for government to sanction religion just as long as it's your religion.
19. You have to believe the homosexual agenda is to get a purple Tele-Tubby to turn our children gay.
20. You have to believe that hunters need assault weapons to assist in natural selection, because they shoot only the starving and sick animals and will not shoot that magnificent 12-point stag. 21. You have to believe that Reagan's tripling the deficit was good for the economy.
22. You have to believe that the best leaders to espouse family values are those with one or more failed marriages (Dole, Reagan, Gingrich, Barr, Limbaugh, etc.)
23. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you are millionaire conservative radio jock, which makes it an "illness" and needs our prayers for "recovery."
24. You have to believe that the members of your national convention represent a good cross-sectional and diverse group of Americans.
25. You have to believe that a national sales tax is better than income tax because everyone uses the same proportion of their income to buy food, clothing, and housing, but really, the only good tax is one which only the poor pay.
26. You have to believe Jesus was a Conservative and shares your hatred of AIDS victims, homosexuals, and President Clinton. You also ask yourself "What would Jesus Do?" and completely ignore the fact that he stayed out of politics, never tried to get a law passed, never tried to obtain wealth, nor spoke of divisive drivel.
27. You believe that charitable organizations should take care of the poor and then give nothing to charity (i.e. Dick Cheney).
28. You believe that a rape victim should be forced to raise her attacker's offspring and then fight her attempts to get welfare when she tries to do so.
29. You have to believe a poor, minority student with a disciplinary history and failing grades will be admitted into an elite private school with a $1,000 voucher (Dubya doesn't count, because he's not a minority. He just became President with the minority).
30. You have to believe that a great way to lower air pollution is to get others to ride mass transit; that way you can get to work in your SUV much faster.
31. You have to believe the talk of Randy Weaver and David Koresh are more important than actions of Franklin Roosevelt and Martin Luther King, and what happened at Ruby Ridge is more important than what happened at Selma, Alabama.
32. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton was crazy for talking to spirits in the White House, but Nancy Reagan is OK for consulting astrologers to help her decide U.S. policies while Ronnie was in the hospital.
33. You have to believe everything that is said by right-wing wackos on talk radio.
34) You have to believe that Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him with chemical weapons to fight Iran, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney was doing business with him for Halliburton, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
35) You have to believe that the lumber from the last one percent of old growth U.S. forests is well worth the extinction of several species of plants and animals therein. Besides, it will prevent forest fires.
36) You have to believe that Aid to Mothers with Dependent children is wasteful, but giving tax breaks to companies moving American jobs overseas is just what government is for.
37) You have to believe that trade with Cuba is wrong because it is communist, but trading with China and Vietnam is good.
38) You have to believe that the public has a right to know what the government is doing but that Bush was right to censor those 28 pages from the Congressional 9/11 report because you just can't handle the truth."

I may be biased, but I think that this last one is a little bit more of a slam-dunk than the first one. But, then again, I can more easily dismiss the first one as flawed caricature and accept this one as a legitimate critique simply because of how I identify myself politically. Funny how that works...oh well, I doubt that it is indicative of a larger flaw in the way that politics work and the way that humans think, in general....

These are Your Morals on the Internet

This is an interesting site. Particularly if you're an atheist. You can get a chance to see how your "morals" stack up compared to the average of test-takers (of course, since the majority of test takers seem to be "non-religious", maybe that is a bit hard to do). It's a quite fun, and addictive for a few hours. Of course, once I dug into some of the later tests, it just got depressing. It is really annoying to compare scores to other people who like to choose extreme answers over realistic, moderate ones. Eh. Anyway, it's a nice, tiny window into your conscience, and it is a worth a shot, all in all.

Atheism: As conceived by those who believe that atheism is inconceivable.

This, my friends, is a flow chart showing how one becomes addicted to atheism!
And here I thought that my daily PCP binges and delicious baby corpse supply were enough to be addicted to. But, apparently, I am also addicted to not believing in god(s). It's like crack to me, I just can't enough of "no God". But, don't take my word for it! Let's go through the process, so that I could admit to all my fellow snorters of the cocaine of naturalism, and finally accept my grievous ailment.

Okay, first symptom is "sin". I have a strong desire to do something morally wrong, that nice, ethically infallible religion would expressly forbid me from doing. I know that I explicitly said to myself, when learning about Judaism, that I would never join them because I have strong desire to eat non-kosher foods. I explicitly forbade myself from becoming a Muslim because I am not the kind of guy who likes to fast, and I really don't that whole pray five times a day thing. I have a schedule to keep, dammit, and I need myself a deity that can understand that! And, after years of searching, I finally came upon Christianity, and saw that they didn't allow people to have sex before marriage! Well, since obviously no Christian could ever break that moral code and still consider themselves sincerely to be amongst the ranks of the saved, I decided to shun Christianity in order to live a carefree of debauched sex that no Christian has ever lived in the course of known history.

The second symptom would be redundant, but I need to see how badly I am afflicted. So, I ask myself, "am I angry with God"? Well, obviously. I am an atheist; the only way that I could fall into such a wretched state is if something catastrophic happened in my past to drive me away from the default assumption which every human being should have crammed into their head: that there is a God, and it is the one described in the Bible, with no possible deviations at all. So, logically, if something bad happened to me, then God is not just, and therefore there cannot possibly be any gods at all. At least that is what my pastor told me before I ran him down with my tractor.

Third symptom is follower syndrome. Yep. Got a boatload of that. There are atheists swarming all around in my neck of the woods, we have congregations where we meet and make sure that we have identical beliefs, and every single idea I have in my head is directly taken from a Richard Dawkins book. I only do what I am told, make arguments that have been made a thousands times before, and refuse to change my position. At complete odds with the religious in that regard.

And now, for the product of those three initial drives: discarding of God. I guess, as an atheist, I have done that. If I hadn't, well...I guess I need a better dictionary.

Oh, and now for the results! First, there is a sense of freedom, where the world becomes topsy-turvy, where sin becomes acceptable, virtue becomes meaningless, and you are exempt from any possible consequences for indulging in your desire to spend hours sodomizing cats. There just is no morality without Jesus looking over your shoulder.

And, our second result is narcissism, where we become our own god when there is none to worship. This sounds about right, as I have yet to meet an arrogant, narcissitic, or prideful religious person in my entire life. There is absolutely no way that you can use your faith to vicariously elevate yourself over others...at all.

This all leads to the inevitable loss of purpose inherent in refusing to accept the undeniable reality that we are all Jesus's divine Chia Pet. Without using excessive theology to explain why we humans obviously have a purpose in the grand scheme things (no matter how crappy that purpose truly is.), we are left without value, and left in a dark depression that forces us to accept the Truth that is Jesus Christ! (Please disregard the fact that a similar depression supposedly leads away from religion...)

And, failing to do this, you are banished to a temporary eternity of hedonism and arguments against religion, since Christianity is the only surefire cure for your physical urges and your desire to tear down establishments through ranting and polemic! Accept Jesus today, and you too can be free from the endless cycle that has been brought upon you by your strong urge to kill, your tragic memory of your little sister drowning at summer camp, and the vile temptations that are the writings of Richard Dawkins. Fight your terrible, unspeakable desires, put your obvious hatred of God for tragedies of yesteryear behind you, and stop worshipping those atheistic authors, and you too can trick yourself into believing that you have the answers, and yet feel as if that is not an inherently egotistic way of thinking. Reclaim your life's purpose today, and get a free T-shirt! *

(Note: You already own the T-shirt, and you will be instructed to give it to yourself upon winning the contest. If you do not own a T-shirt already, you will be instructed to buy one yourself and the expenses will be put toward the contest entry fee, which will be exactly equal to the price of the T-shirt. Offer not valid in Utah, Ohio, or Wyoming, for reasons known only to me and the women who have restraining orders against me in those states. We will not be held legally responsible if your T-shirt happens to suck.)

Where the second set of footprints really went...

The devil may be the one admitting it, but you know that Jesus must have gone piggyback and pushed cocaine on us during at least one occasion. It would be negligent of him to not do so...

Ahahahahahaha

Hahahahahaha ah heh hoo...huh...

This site may not be a joke...but it is still disturbingly hilarious

Case in point: "But God wants you to succeed, and that’s why he has given us an alternative to intercourse before marriage: anal sex."

Meh heh...ha...ummm...gotta love when people stay true to God's word by trying to find loopholes in it so that they can justify doing whatever the hell they want....


Edit: (Talking about Onan and the problem of "spilling seed") "Getting ejaculate on oneself or one’s clothing results in uncleanness that requires extensive reparations and atonement. Obviously one simple way to prevent the spillage of semen is to have your partner perform fellatio and swallow the emission"

(Can't...stop...laughing! These people have some serious problems...)

Linkage

Atheist sites:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/ (Once you've read through some of the quotes, the articles, and comedy material offered, the only thing this site has to offer is the occassional news and video link. Still, nice site to go to if you haven't already spent hours on it previously).
http://whydoesgodhateamputees.com/god5.htm
http://www.fstdt.com/ (You can comment on the horrible fundie comments that are dragged onto the site, so, needless to say, it is rather addictive).
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/ (Warning: parody site!)
http://www.infidels.org/
http://www.positiveatheism.org/index.shtml
http://www.godlessgeeks.com/ (especially http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm)
http://richarddawkins.net/
http://godisimaginary.com/i11.htm
http://www.rationalresponders.com/

Atheist/Agnostic blogs:
http://gods4suckers.net/ (Loads of hilarious posts to wade through)
http://friendlyatheist.com/
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/
http://www.enterthejabberwock.com/ (Make sure to check out the Chick tract dissections)
http://www.atheists.org/nogodblog/
http://www.possummomma.blogspot.com/
http://uncrediblehallq.blogspot.com/

Religious resources:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/index.htm (Religions of all kinds, offered up objectively...which means that it happens to favor atheist's arguments most of the time. Convenient, no?)

Christian sites:
http://www.crossroad.to/ (Makes seemingly convincing arguments...but still excessively adherent to her perception of what the Bible demands of Christians. So, basically, typical fundie.)
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ (Note: disorganized and often unintelligible)
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/ (As above)
http://www.tencommandments.org/ (Really hates gays and atheists...it's disturbing, really).
http://www.chick.com/default.asp (His religious tracts are legendary...but not in a good way...)
http://logosresourcepages.org/idx_occult.htm (Even funnier if you are familiar with Dungeons and Dragons, et. al.)
http://christiananswers.net/spotlight/home.html (Movie reviews + Christian sensibilities=hilarious)
http://christiancrosstalk.blogspot.com/ (Won't stop ranting about the evils of atheism...scary...)

Some of these are obscure and probably of little interest to most people. Others of them are incredibly popular to the extent that I probably shouldn't even mention them. But, hey...doing things that make sense is not my style!

The Birthday Massacre!

Happy Birthday

Video Kid

Lovers End

To Die For

Just posted 'em for kicks. Enjoy, or don't.

Classic!

Stop the presses!!! Some Christians on the internet think that they can prove that God exists! This is super serious guys!

Step One: "The first step towards the proof that God exists is to determine whether you actually believe that laws of logic exist. Logical proof would be irrelevant to someone who denies that laws of logic exist. An example of a law of logic is the law of non-contradiction. This law states, for instance, that it cannot both be true that my car is in the parking lot and that it is not in the parking lot at the same time, and in the same way."

I can already see where this is going...and it is retarded. But, yes, the "laws" of logic exist. Please, commence the idiocy.

Step Two: "The basic operations of arithmetic are addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Laws of mathematics then, are basically descriptions of what happens within these operations (and more complex ones as well) . For example, with the law of addition we know that if you take 4 things and add them to 3 things, you end up with 7 things."

Uggghh...yes...the "laws" of mathematics exist too. Can you please get on with your petty semantics argument already?

Step Three: "Laws of science are basically descriptions of what matter does based on repeated observations, and are usually expressed in mathematical equations. An example of a law of science is the law of gravity. Using the law of gravity, we can predict how fast a heavier than air object will fall to the ground given all the factors for the equation"

You're killing me here! Yes...matter tends to behave a certain way that we have basic rules for describing...therefore, Jesus, right?

Step Four: "I have seldom heard anyone deny that laws of logic, mathematics, or science exist, but I have often heard people deny the existence of absolute moral laws. Whereas laws of logic, science, and mathematics describe reality, and how things do behave, absolute moral laws describe how humans ought to, or ought not to behave.
Rape, and child molestation, are two examples of absolute moral wrongs"

Interesting that he brings up two of the most offensive acts that he could think of, that have little justification within our culture, but, nonetheless, were nowhere near as condemned in societies before this point in time. In fact, these examples of objectively immoral behavior are not spoken out against in the Bible. Maybe that was one of the lost commandments. In this sense, even though it is logically wrong to these things, and such acts are abhorrent to our modern sensibilities, I cannot say that are objectively wrong in any sense beyond the harm they cause, beyond a reasoned look at its unfairness and how exploitative such actions are.

But, sense going with subjectivity ends with the following screed, I will consent that there is objective morality, defined by the logical dictates of equality and group dynamics, rather than by what God slides down to us on stone tablets.

Step Five: "By reaching this page you have acknowledged that laws of logic, mathematics, science, and absolute morality exist. Next we will examine what you believe about these laws. Are these laws material, or are they immaterial? In other words, are they made of matter, or are they 'abstract' entities? - are they physical or non-physical things?"

This is just dumb. The laws themselves do not exist, either physically or non-physically, as "entities". They are explanations for how physical things tend to behave, they do not exist in of themselves. *sigh*. Whatever...abstract.

Step Six: "You have acknowledged that laws of logic, mathematics, science, and absolute morality exist and that they are not material. The next question is whether you believe they are universal or up to the individual. Does 2 + 2 = 4 only where you are, and only because you say it does, or is this a universal law?"

Mathematics, though designed by men to describe reality, will continue to describe reality in the same fashion regardless of human input. Morality is irrelevant without individual input, and is far from universal (I mean, hell, there is a reason why you didn't include murder as an example of objective morality...what, with warmongering, and all...). Logic is irrelevant without a person observing reality to use it and the rules of logic are only universal in the sense that we assume to be able to be applied in that fashion (whether or not is actually effective to do so). I'd say that they are universal in a sense, but only imperfectly so.

Step Seven: "You have acknowledged that laws of logic, mathematics, science, and absolute morality exist, that they are not material, and that they are universal. The next question is whether you believe they are changing or unchanging"

The rules of logic, mathematics, and science do not change because they are based upon the assumption that the rules do not change. It is not very convincing to point out that these man-made constructs, used to describe our observations of reality, are assumed to not change to reflect our subjective experience of a reality that is relatively unchanging in the aspects that those "laws" are explaining.

Step Eight: "Only in a universe governed by God can universal, immaterial, unchanging laws exist. Only in a universe governed by God can rational thinking be possible. We use rational thinking to prove things. Therefore...the proof that God exists is that without Him you couldn't prove anything."

Hahahahaha...that's rich. "The Bible says: God gives us X. We have X. Therefore, God exists."

You seriously don't see the problem with assuming that God has these qualities described in the Bible in order to make your conclusion? Don't see any problem at all with jumping to the claim that ONLY under this God could things behave in this fashion? It could not simply be that the universe naturally exists in a consistent, and ordered state, and that sheer, unmitigated chaos would be a better proof of divine reign that order?

Really, nice effort. This argument always seems convincing on its face. But, when you factor in the idea that the laws you mention are simply observations of how things tend to act, rather than hardset boundaries on what can and cannot occur, and then see clearly that you are already presupposing the existence of God by attributing Him with immaterial laws governing existence, you may as well be saying that "The Universe exists, therefore God exists". It's pretty much the same thing, except at least that argument doesn't take 8 steps and is honest in the fact that it does not prove anything.

So, internet philosophers, what tired, feeble excuse of an argument for God's existence will you bring back from a dusty coffin next?

I'm bad at this...

I just lost the game.. Score:7 months.

Oh well...thank God for weariness and poor short term memory!

[Note to self: Do not read this post ever again...]

Update: ...dammit...

Look at what I made! Look!

What can I say...I was bored...

What's this about a Creationist movie?

Expelled
Expelled
Expelled
Expelled
Expelled
Expelled

(Note: That is the sound I make when I bang my head against my desk now...)

Gwarrrrrr! Ach ach ahcaacchahala!

I hate Spring! The weather transitions from 40 degrees and windy to 70 degrees and blindingly sunny outside! I hate it! HATE! HATE! HATE!

At least I knew where I stood with winter...but with spring, I have only two choices. I could bring my coat with me and risk having to drag it along with me all day while sweat slowly accumulates all over me, and I demonstrate to all who see me exactly how fat I truly am. Or I could leave my coat behind and walk free and unencumbered, at the ever so real risk of freezing my ass off when it turns out to be colder than it looks outside.

Oh, and people are now spending more time outside, being active, and happy. It truly nauseates me. Hate it. Can't wait for fall...

Maxims, Musings, and Manslaughter, Part One

If the Matrix trilogy was actually a documentary, does that mean that I should stop taking Viagra if I want to help defend the City of Zion? And does it also justify my fear of getting sucked through telephones? Also...does it mean that my friend wasn't lying when he was drunk and telling me how he dodged bullets? I need answers now!

Epic Suicide Notes? Anyone?

To be honest, I don't really contemplate suicide in any serious manner, because I am far too hateful to take my own life, and leave neighborhoods filled with happy people completely unheckled. We all need a purpose, and mine is to be a bitter, soulless buzzkill who spends his entire day inside a house with closed curtains, leering at people who dare to make eye contact with me when I go out to grab the newspaper on the front steps, and shouting occasionally at that damn kid who always brings his dog to crap on my lawn.

But, after hearing about some kid who recently jumped out of a window on the 17th floor of his dorm building, and reading the articles written about it, about how mysterious and bizarre his motivations are for having done such an unthinkable act, I begin to start thinking. What questions pop up in other people close to a person who kills themselves, and how could you write a suicide note that served to help the people you left behind to cope, rather than leaving a few enigmatic phrases scrawled on the back of napkin?

Well, first, I read through one of the articles in the newspaper written about this tragedy, condemning Mental Health Services for not properly caring for this kid (which is incredibly ignorant, because these people are not psychic, depression is common, and there is little effective treatment for depresssion aside from handing out antidepressants, which also are ineffective in their own ways, or spending months, or even years, in therapy, which is beyond the scope of what could offered to every student by the school psychologists alone). It was after that when I determined that the first thing that should be addressed is that casual acquaintances and mental health professionals should not be held accountable for the decision to take your own life. The suicide note should be written to fully explain that there is no one person responsible for your decision, and that blame should not be bantied about in regards to matter.

Related to explicitly denying any individual person's fault in the matter, and assuring them that there was very little that they could do (assuming that that is actually the case), you should clearly and eloquently explain the motivations behind killing yourself, why it is more than just a little bout of sadness that spurred such activity, and to reassure family members and loved ones that you do not want them to feel guilty, to acknowledge that you know that they loved you, but that merely knowing that to be true could not help you become happier, and that it was not enough of an excuse to endure living. And, after expounding upon the benefits granted by not living (in that there is no more pain, and you do not have to worry about success anymore), you can try to leave the reader with the notion that you did not kill yourself in moment of blind passion or sorrow, but with resolve, coldly rational and profoundly tinged with suffering, that justifies it, even if the reasons seem petty.

It is a suicide note that would tie up questions of legal rights, all questions of motivation, of blame, of whether there could have been something to stop them or if death really was the best solution (slightly more common among the elderly). It would be one that would leave doubts about their mindset, and would leave no room for misinterpretting, no room for dismissing them as weak, no room for finding people to shove guilt upon. It would be a perfectly written tome, a masterpiece, a document worthy of being published by its own merits. It would be an expression of thought and emotion so eloquent, that the writer's passing from the world would be without incident, as all mysteries surrounding the departure would be perfectly explained within the text left behind, and would be written in a manner that was soothing enough to make mourning transition into acceptance faster than could possibly be expected for even the most anticipated of demises.

It would be an epic among suicide notes, providing insight into the minds of such people for generations to come. Unfortunately, most people in such a state really do not have the mindset to decide to leave anything for posterity, and, also unfortunately, I am not of the impression that my own thoughts are typical enough of those in the depths of depression to be able to leave a message on all such people's behalf. So...this little conceit is nothing more than a perverse idealistic dream. But, I'm sure that someday, somewhere, such a document will exist. Of course, by the time I realize this, I'll probably stop caring.

Short attention span powers, activate!!!

Random Number Realities: A little fun with Pascal's Roulette

See Pascal's Roulette for information about what the hell these are:

Reality One: (Random numbers 3, 9 and 12 for each respective category of Deity, Doctrine, and Afterlife on my previous chart). Pantheist deity with a doctrine of works and ritual, and an afterlife of Heaven, Reincarnation, or Oblivion. This is a rather odd theological/cosmological occurence, but it actually seems like it could just be a combination of karmic reincarnation (fueled by works), overseen by a collective energy kind of deity that only allows one to break the reincarnation through a certain combination of morality and obscure ritual accomplishment, with your fate being determined by the nature of the accomplishment. The Oblivion or Heaven thing could simply to different final outcomes, depending upon your inner character, or it could simply be that your reward is to become one with the pantheistic deity, and thus Heaven is Oblivion....

Reality Two: (Random numbers 6, 14, and 8). No God, all four criteria judged, with an afterlife of either Heaven or Oblivion. This is the interesting idea that there need not be an active deity overseeing you in order for there to be life after death. In this case, though, it seems odd, because you can presumably only attain a reward afterlife if you have faith, along with wisdom, good deeds, and ritual accomplishments of an unknown nature, even though there is nothing to have faith in. The reason why faith is criteria, however, is because it is necessary to have faith in the God that you are worshipping, which is supposedly the one exists. However, no God exists in this scenario, so faith is either moot and ignored, or one must have had "faith" in the existence of no Gods in order to attain the afterlife. This would be an interesting case of Pascal's Wager favoring atheism, if that interpretation were correct.

Reality Three: (Random numbers 3, 14, and 10). A pantheistic god, again. And all doctrine required, again. Afterlife is Heaven, Hell, or reincarnation. So, this is world energy god that requires you to undergo certain rituals, to have faith that a collective spiritual force exists in the world, for you to do good deeds, and for you to attain wisdom in order to go to attain a positive afterlife. Presumably, if you are on the way to attaining these goals, you would keep reincarnating until you reached them. And, if you, instead of attaining these goals, consistently proved oneself to be in opposition to other lives and opposed to collective energy god, along with doing bad deeds and refusing to perform the required rituals, or seek the required wisdom, would be sent away to the punishment afterlife. It's like a bizarre form of Judaism fused with Hinduism, to an extent.

Reality Four: (Random numbers 6, 1, and 10). No God, only faith, and Heaven, Hell, or Reincarnation. Interestingly, another reality where the hardcore (level 7 on the Dawkins scale) atheist is favored, apparently. I assume that Heaven is awarded to the hard atheists, and lesser atheists along with agnostics are reincarnated in order to give them a second chance. Those who had faith in false gods would be punished in Hell for their presumptions. A truly bizarre existence.

Reality Five: (Random numbers 1, 7, and 10). [sigh] Okay, monotheistic god judging by faith and ritual. That much is new, at least. Afterlife is Heaven, Hell, or Reincarnation as it has been for the last two realities. Now, this actually resembles the Judeo-Christian worldview fairly closely. It has their kind of God controlling it. That God judges according to faith (which the Christians like and the Jews presumably have anyway) and ritual (more problematic to the Christian, only problematic to the Jew if the rituals that he adheres happen to not be the ones that their deity is concerned with). And he sends non-believers to Hell, true believers to Heaven, and everyone in between is reincarnated until they can be clearly divided based upon the God's criteria for judgment.

Reality Six: (Random numbers 1, 12, and 3). Huh. Monotheistic god, with a Heaven and Hell (even closer to Christian worldview than the last one), who judges based on faith, works, and ritual. So, this would basically work just like Pascal's Wager, except that, instead of just non-believers going to Hell, it would also be people who were not sufficiently good, and people who did not perform the right specific actions necessary to get into heaven (circumcision, baptism, daily prayer, ritual scarring, blood letting, what have you). As such, it is still a little messy....

Reality Seven: (Random numbers 2, 7, and 10) Goddamn Hell, Heaven, and Reincarnation! Well, we've got a polytheism, and another faith and ritual method of judgment. So...this is basically just like Reality Five, except that there a significant number of anthropomorphic gods in control of deciding your fate and who need to be believed in, rather than just the one.


Conclusions: Theology is a bitch.

Meta-pirating: Youtube Soundtrack to Insanity, Part 1.

Alright, I'm sure that we've all heard that lecture about not stealing music, about how the music will be left in tatters if we download it illegally, and don't pay for it, and all that jazz.

Well, I am doing my goddamn part! I absolutely refuse to illegally download music for free of the crime-facilitating network that is the heathen internet. I watch youtube videos that have the music I want to listen to on it instead!

So, I give to you, my non-existent captive audience, the gift that is a taste of my music playlist, to provide you with much needed insight into which group of bands, and which genre of music is guilty of sending demons into my home and controlling my activity during the particular moment during which I type my rantings...


First up, a bit of a two-fer: a song by a band I've never heard of, playing a song that is in no other youtube videos, with episodes of the anime Death Note playing on the screen (not that I actually watch the youtube videos often, but what I've seen of it is pretty decent).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNli5T2hXbM [Project Pitchfork -"Lightwave";Death Note AMV]

Second, is the infinitely less German, and several times more awesome, song by Mastodon. If you have seen the Aqua Teen Hunger Force movie, you should be familiar with this song, and the scene depicted, since it was the high point of the entire film.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iy3fXI_tsG0 [Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film For Theaters Intro; Mastodon-"Linoleum Knife"]

Next, I bring to the attention of the court one relatively unknown band called, "Korn", which I believe was a misspelling that they decided to run with in order to not incur the price of reprinting their original record covers. I've even heard rumors that they botched the band name so badly that the "r" was capitalized, and positioned backwards....but they never let that adversity keep them down! Anyway, they offer us this mellow, and tranquil piece, which, if I understand it correctly, was written about accepting your inner self, and the beauty in the world around us:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqRBNNwVF3I [Korn-Here to Stay]

Our fourth piece comes from the depths of musical antiquity: 1989. A heartfelt song, with a haunting melody, sung by a creepy bald dude about hobos. It has all the ingredients of a masterpiece. If only it involved him getting the STDs, it would have attained perfection, but, he falls short in that regard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftlYLcEW_I4 [Phil Collins- Another day in paradise]

The fifth musical entry is a tale of an epic battle , the likes of the world has never before seen. A clash of the Titans. The struggle between the greatest imaginable entities, whose sheer unbridled majesty makes our world shake to its very core. A battle between gods as we know them. The fight to decide the fate of our puny mortal existence.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster vs. The Invisible Pink Unicorn:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TagemN7kkw

And, for a bonus, a give unto you, the invisible, nameless masses, the gift that is the following song by the Bastard Fairies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTOffYj5TxU.
It is the upbeat message that we all know is true in the depths of our hearts, but deny due to our stubborn rationality, and our arrogant detachment from the beauty of existence. It is a cheerful, merry assertion of what is surely to come, of what each and everyone our purposes really is. It is the wonderful, beautiful, and liberating truth that we are all going to Hell. (Bonus: the singer is hot).

Anyway, that is it for this week. Happy non-pirating!