Monday, 30 April 2012

Secular Café: "Is faith the rejection of reality?"

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
"Is faith the rejection of reality?"
Apr 30th 2012, 16:25

An interesting column in the Huffington Post by Rabbi Alan Lurie. This is a very Jewish perspective; notice the focus on THIS world, and the fact that "God," never mind "belief in" or "existence of" same, is mentioned nowhere.

Like I keep saying; obsession with the supernatural is not necessarily a component of religion.

Is Faith the Rejection of Reality?

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Sunday, 29 April 2012

Secular Café: The God Gene

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
The God Gene
Apr 30th 2012, 02:23

I am sure this has been discussed before, but a friend of mine and I were talking about it and I invited him here to SC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene

So, may we rehash? I haven't seen a discussion on this in many years. :D

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: The Reason Religion Persists: Fear of Death

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
The Reason Religion Persists: Fear of Death
Apr 29th 2012, 19:36

http://www.atheistrev.com/2012/04/re...-of-death.html

I like the cartoon....and I really agree with the text....

Quote:



Paul Waldman hits the nail on the head in a recent article in The American Prospect when he provides this answer to the question of why religion has persisted even as science and reason have made it less necessary:

Quote:

Why? Death, of course. Which helps explain why religion has such staying power.
Drawing on data from a recent survey of 30 countries conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago, Waldman notes that religious belief is declining across much of the world at a very slow rate. You have undoubtedly heard many atheists talk about the cohort effect, which shows that younger generations are less religious than older generations. This gives many of us hope because it suggests that we are gradually outgrowing religion. However, Waldman also points out that aging appears to affect the data such that individuals tend to become somewhat more religious as they age.

Quote:

As in so many other areas, we are more likely to believe that the thing we would like to be true is in fact true. As you age you see more and more of your family and friends die, and the thought that they are living in paradise and you'll see them again one day is enormously comforting… Even more powerful is the thought of your own mortality, which becomes harder and harder to ignore with each passing year.
So for those asking how people can continue to cling to religious belief in our modern age, the answer would appear to be the reality of death and religion's promise of immortality.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Excellent example of closed minded Religionists

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Excellent example of closed minded Religionists
Apr 29th 2012, 11:29
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Why I'm an Atheist: Tracy Hemenover

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Why I'm an Atheist: Tracy Hemenover
Apr 29th 2012, 11:21

on PZ web:

Quote:

Why I am an atheist – Tracy Hemenover
April 28, 2012 at 11:56 pm PZ Myers
Atheism

Because I finally stopped bullshitting myself that I believed in “something out there”, not anything portrayed in any of the religious texts, but “something”. Anything to not have to think that scary A word.

Because the universe and everything in it, and everything we know about how it works, makes much more sense if there is no god than if there is one.

Because there is not and never has been any argument or “proof” of the existence of god(s), etc. that stood up to ANY honest, thorough, logical scrutiny. EVER. Not. Even. One. (And it’s not as if believers haven’t had *thousands* of years to come up with one, either.)

Because of all the good things that religion does, *not one* requires religion or belief in god in order to happen. I don’t believe, yet I treat people ethically, I give to charity, I’m kind to animals. But there’s plenty of evil things that religion does that are either a direct result of religion, or are justified or made worse by it: misogyny, homophobia, racism, war, etc.

Because “throughout history, every mystery ever solved has turned out to be NOT MAGIC.” (Thank you, Tim Minchin.)

Because the whole notion of the universe being created by a perfect being is nonsensical and self-contradictory. Perfection means no lack of anything, ergo no reason to create anything. And supposing such a being *did* create a universe and us, how did it manage to screw up so royally on so many things? I mean, putting our airway and esophagus right next to each other with just a little valve to stop food going down the wrong way? Really? That’s the best it can do? (True fact: I once damn near choked to death on an M&M. Not even a whole M&M, a fucking half-chewed fragment of an M&M. Tell me that’s not a design flaw.)

Because, also supposing a perfect being created the universe and us, why would that supposedly perfect being give a flying fuck what we thought of it, or what we wanted? Ooh, what’s that? It loves us? Then why doesn’t it regrow amputated limbs? Why do kids die of cancer, etc.? Because their parents didn’t grovel just right? Why is my best friend a prisoner of crippling pain leaving her barely able to walk while evil assholes get to run around completely healthy all their lives?
....
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...ought+Blogs%29

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Saturday, 28 April 2012

Secular Café: Catholic pupils 'invited to sign anti-gay marriage petition'

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Catholic pupils 'invited to sign anti-gay marriage petition'
Apr 29th 2012, 00:12

From the BBC News Website

Quote:

Education Secretary Michael Gove is to examine claims the Catholic Education Service (CES) broke impartiality rules on the topic of gay marriage.

It emerged this week that the CES wrote to nearly 400 state-funded Roman Catholic schools inviting them to back a petition against gay civil marriage.

Schools and teachers are forbidden to promote one-sided political arguments.

The CES has denied breaking any laws, saying Catholic views on marriage are religious, not political.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17883093

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: I love this argument

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
I love this argument
Apr 28th 2012, 08:45

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...he-bottle.html

No discussion of what religous education might be for -- just an apparent belief that religions that have been around or imposed for longer don't need justifying.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Qualifications for this new grouping:

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Qualifications for this new grouping:
Apr 28th 2012, 08:38

Believe the unprovable and hate gays.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...sh-groups.html

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Friday, 27 April 2012

Secular Café: Scientifically, God Does Not Exist: Science Allows us to Say God Does Not Exist

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Scientifically, God Does Not Exist: Science Allows us to Say God Does Not Exist
Apr 27th 2012, 16:03

http://atheism.about.com/od/argument...ience.htm?nl=1

Thought I'd drop this in, retire to a safe distance and... :popcorn:

Quote:

A popular objection to atheists' arguments and critiques of theism is to insist that one's preferred god cannot be disproven — indeed, that science itself is unable to prove that God does not exist. This position depends upon a mistaken understanding of the nature of science and how science operates. In a very real and important sense, it is possible to say that, scientifically, God does not exist — just as science is able to discount the existence of a myriad of other alleged beings.



What Can Science Prove or Disprove?

To understand why "God does not exist" can be a legitimate scientific statement, it's important to understand what the statement means in the context of science. When a scientist says "God does not exist," they mean something similar to when they say "aether does not exist," "psychic powers do not exist," or "life does not exist on the moon."

All such statements are casual short-hand for a more elaborate and technical statement: "this alleged entity has no place in any scientific equations, plays no role in any scientific explanations, cannot be used to predict any events, does not describe any thing or force that has yet been detected, and there are no models of the universe in which its presence is either required, productive, or useful."

What should be most obvious about the more technically accurate statement is that it isn't absolute. It does not deny for all time any possible existence of the entity or force in question; instead, it's a provisional statement denying the existence of any relevance or reality to the entity or force based on what we currently know. Religious theists may be quick to seize upon this and insist that it demonstrates that science cannot "prove" that God does not exist, but that requires far too strict of a standard for what it means to "prove" something scientifically.



Scientific Proof Against God

In God: The Failed Hypothesis — How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist, Victor J. Stenger offers this scientific argument against the existence of God:

Hypothesize a God who plays an important role in the universe.
Assume that God has specific attributes that should provide objective evidence for his existence.
Look for such evidence with an open mind.
If such evidence is found, conclude that God may exist.
If such objective evidence is not found, conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that a God with these properties does not exist.
This is basically how science would disprove the existence of any alleged entity and is modified form of the argument from a lack-of-evidence: God, as defined, should produce evidence of some sort; if we fail to find that evidence, God cannot exist as defined. The modification limits the sort of evidence to that which can be predicted and tested via the scientific method.



Certainty & Doubt in Science

Nothing in science is proven or disproven beyond a shadow of any possible doubt. In science, everything is provisional. Being provisional is not a weakness or a sign that a conclusion is weak. Being provisional is a smart, pragmatic tactic because we can never be sure what we'll come across when we round the next corner. This lack of absolute certainty is a window through which many religious theists try to slip their god, but that's not a valid move.

In theory, it may be possible that someday we will come across new information requiring or benefiting from some sort of "god" hypothesis in order to better make sense of the way things are. If the evidence described in the above argument were found, for example, that would justify a rational belief in the existence of the sort of god under consideration. It wouldn't prove the existence of such a god beyond all doubt, though, because belief would still have to be provisional.

By the same token, though, it may be possible that the same could be true of an infinite number of other hypothetical beings, forces, or other things which we might invent. The mere possibility of existing is one that applies to any and every possible god, but religious theists only try to use it for whatever god they happen to personally favor. The possibility for needing a "god" hypothesis applies equally as well to Zeus and Odin as it does to the Christian god; it applies equally well to evil or disinterested gods as it does to good gods. Thus even if we limit our consideration to the possibility of a god, ignoring every other random hypothesis, there's still no good reason to pick out any one god for favorable consideration.



What Does "God Exists" Mean?

What does it mean to exist? What would it mean if "God exists" were a meaningful proposition? For such a proposition to mean anything at all, it would have to entail that whatever "God" is, it must have some impact on the universe. In order for us to say that there is an impact on the universe, then there must be measurable and testable events which would best or only be explained by whatever this "God" is we are hypothesizing. Believers must be able to present a model of the universe in which some god is "either required, productive, or useful."

This is obviously not the case. Many believers work hard trying to find a way to introduce their god into scientific explanations, but none have succeeded. No believer has been able to demonstrate, or even strongly suggest, that there are any events in the universe which requires some alleged "god" to explain. Instead, these constantly failing attempts end up reinforcing the impression that there is no "there" there — nothing for "gods" to do, no role for them to play, and no reason to give them a second thought. It's technically true that the constant failures don't mean that no one will ever succeed, but it's even more true that in every other situation where such failures are so consistent, we don't acknowledge any reasonable, rational, or serious reason to bother believing.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Food for Thought: Analytic vs Intuitive Thinking

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Food for Thought: Analytic vs Intuitive Thinking
Apr 27th 2012, 17:40

According to Science Daily News: Analytic Thinking Can Decrease Religious Belief, Study Shows. My initial intuition was that this conclusion made no sense. But the more I thought about it, the more it did. :D

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Can God love?

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Can God love?
Apr 27th 2012, 16:20

Can God love?

We are told that the mythical bible God is love or the epitome of love.

Archetypal Jesus said that we would know his people by the love, deeds and actions they showed others.

Jesus gave us examples of the deeds and works. Feed the poor, love all our neighbours, do not sin and many others.

Love then, seems to Jesus, to be something that must be shown by deeds, actions and works to be alive and true love. Love, like faith, without works is dead. Both St. James and Jesus agree on this.

It follows then that if God is not doing something to show this love then the love for man expressed in scriptures is wrong and God cannot love.

You are in the image of God. When you love someone you show them that love by works and deeds. This is how the recipient of that love knows it is there and that allows for reciprocity. You will agree that without reciprocity, true love cannot exist between two individuals. We must do things for each other for true love to exist.

Imagine what those you love would think if you never did anything to express your love. Imagine what you would think of the love of others towards you if they never did anything to show they loved you. See what I mean. Love always must have deeds to be real and true and reciprocity must be at play.

Love then has no choice but to be expressed if it is true love.

We are told that God loved his son so much that he planned to have him sacrificed even before the earth was created. This human sacrifice or any other human sacrifice, voluntary or not, is immoral and the notion that it is good to sacrifice an innocent victim to give the guilty believers a free ride into heaven is a completely self-gratifying notion and is completely immoral. One does not show love for someone by having them sacrificed for the sins of others when God himself stated that we are all responsible for our own salvation and cannot put that responsibility of the shoulders of a scapegoat Jesus.

Does love need deeds and works to be expressed?

Have you seen God express his love for us lately?

Regards
DL

These following speak to this issue if you wish to view them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMXoP...layer_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcO4T...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP7SPJllNoc

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: The state of religion: Declining belief in god worldwide

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
The state of religion: Declining belief in god worldwide
Apr 27th 2012, 15:27

http://www.americanhumanist.org/HNN/...-in-god-worldw


Looks hopeful.....there are more links in the text - best to read the link.

Quote:

By Brian Magee

Two recent studies released almost simultaneously provide more hard evidence that religion is slowly losing its grip on humanity, even in the United States.

First, a report from the University of Chicago called "Belief About God Across Time and Countries" looked at survey data from 30 countries, reaching as far back as 1991. While many of the news stories about this report focused on figures showing a tendency for numbers of religious believers to increase with age, the figures also showed the overall percentage of religious believers declined in most countries, showing an increase in only three:

"…the % saying they were atheists increased in 15 of 18 countries from 1991 to 2008 with an average increase of 1.7 percentage points. For 1998 to 2008, atheists grew in 23 of 30 countries for an average gain of 2.3 points. Conversely … certain belief in God declined in 14 of 18 countries from 1991 to 2008 with an average decrease of 2.4 points and from 1998 to 2008 loses occurred in 24 of 30 countries for a similar average decline of 2.4 points. Likewise … never believing in God rose in 14 of 17 countries from 1991 to 2008 for an average increase of 1.6 points and increased in 20 of 29 countries from 1998 to 2008 by an average gain of 2.2 points."
Second, a study called "The State of the Bible 2012" done by the Barna Group for the American Bible Society found that Americans are losing interest in the Bible. In just one year, the number of people who said they read the Bible to be "closer to God" dropped 9 percentage points from 64% in 2011 to 55% in 2012. Results show a drop from 75% to 69% of people who said "the Bible contains everything a person needs to know to live a meaningful life." Those people who agreed that the Bible has "too much influence" in U.S. society increased from 13% to 16%, while those who thought the Bible had "too little influence" dropped from 54% to 47%.

While these figures are only for the span of a single year, the changes indicated are not small for such a short period of time. Additional surveys will need to be done to show a permanent trend, but other recent studies have given us similar results. For example, the ongoing State of the States survey by Gallup found in 2011 that 40% of Americans are "very religious," down from 65% in 2008. And new research on the Millennials—those between the ages of 18 and 29—show a 20 percent decline from those who were raised Christians and now no longer consider themselves such.

What's happening here? Because results of surveys like these show a great deal of variation based on age and geography, reasons to explain overall trends will be varied. But the results raise some interesting possibilities to consider, including something as simple as bad behavior, hypocrisy, and outlandish assertions on the part of those who claim most publicly and proudly to be religious believers. The areas that those who claim to be religious fail to shine include child abuse scandals, open LGBT discrimination and support for bullying, attacks on women's rights, support for war, pushing for religion in science classrooms, prayer-led public meetings, denying the separation of church and state, withholding medical care in favor of prayer for children … and the list goes on.

Religious-based bad behavior is not limited to the U.S., of course. We've been witnessing a worldwide phenomenon of bad behavior coming from adherents of all of the world's major religions. Everything from death for blasphemy to claims of seeing religious figures in everyday objects only ads to a growing worldwide skepticism about religion as a valid framework for humanity to consider. Cases of bad political and criminal behavior from people who are aligned with those in religious groups are also part of the mix that drives people away from religion. The recent rants of Ted Nugent and mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik are prominent examples.

One thing's for sure: humanists are poised to reach out to the growing number of "nones" and show humanism as the reason-based alternative to traditional religion. It's an opportunity that all of us working for the freethought movement can't afford to miss.

Brian Magee is the communications associate for the American Humanist Association.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Secular Café: Pope calls in Opus Dei shock troops

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Pope calls in Opus Dei shock troops
Apr 27th 2012, 04:53

...to deal with Vatican insiders who are leaking evidence of corruption.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...-vatican-leaks

Quote:

Irritated by the anonymous release of documents to the press this year, Pope Benedict has named Cardinal Julian Herranz, 82, to lead a three-man team which will haul in staffers for questioning and rifle through files until they catch the perpetrators of what has been dubbed "Vatileaks".

A short statement printed on Thursday on the front page of the Vatican's daily newspaper warned the team had a full "pontifical mandate" to "shed complete light" on the whistle blowers, who have lifted the lid on alleged theft and false accounting.

Herranz was a long-time personal secretary to Josemaría Escrivá , the now canonised founder of Opus Dei, which has been accused of excessive secrecy, strict control over members and undue influence within the Vatican – a reputation pushed by Dan Brown's thriller The Da Vinci Code.

One of two cardinals who are members of the group, Herranz has insisted that Opus Dei has "no hidden agenda" and is only interested in the "the message of Christ", but he does appear to be cut out to be a Vatican troubleshooter, once stating that "men need to act decisively, like Jesus Christ – who was a real man".
It looks as though the Vatican is much keener on jumping on the whistle-blowers than on doing anything about the real issues. Haven't they learnt from the scandal about covering up child abuse?

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: your logical fallacy is...poster

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
your logical fallacy is...poster
Apr 26th 2012, 19:24

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/poster

I rather like this....saw the pointer to it on Pharyngula ;)

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Who’s Praying For Their Enemies to Get Breast Cancer?

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Who's Praying For Their Enemies to Get Breast Cancer?
Apr 26th 2012, 17:49

http://www.care2.com/causes/whos-pra...st-cancer.html

That good ol' xian love shining through again.....no doubt followed by the "no true xian" platitudes...

Quote:

A women's prayer group is praying for their fellow women fighting for a secular military to get incurable breast cancer.

The prayer group wrote to a leader of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MFRR) that:

"We pray that the women who work in your MFRR and the women in your family will befall fast moving breast cancer which can not everbe [sic] cured."

The email was addressed to the founder of MFRR Michael Weinstein and followed him hanging up the phone on an abusive call from a member of the prayer group. It names 14 key women members of MFRR and says that they pray they get breast cancer.

The email says: "America … is Jesus' country." MFRR has been fighting since 2005 against a concerted push by what Weinstein calls "the fundamentalist Christian Taliban" against the separation of church and state in the military, and the email is just one example of the nasty push back Weinstein, as well as other supporters of MFRR, has received.

Weinstein is a Republican, Honor Graduate of the United States Air Force Academy and from three generations of members of the military. He established the foundation after his sons received religious discrimination at the Academy, as he had also received. He says:

"This battle started because I was a pissed off parent. I found out that my sons were being called f..ing Jews and being accused of total complicity in the execution of Jesus Christ at the United States Air Force Academy."

Weinstein believes that the activities of the 'Christian Taliban' "is creating an internal national security threat."

Since 2005, more than 27,000 active duty members of the United States Armed Forces have asked for support from MFRR as 'spiritual rape victims/tormentees.' 96% of the service men and women are Christians themselves. Among the cases the group has litigated are those of threats of violence against atheist service persons.

It was MFRR who uncovered the Jesus rifles controversy, when rifle scopes manufactured by US government contractor Trijicon were discovered to be engraved with biblical scripture citations.

Last year, MFRR uncovered that the ethical indoctrination course material for nuclear missile launch officers contained Christian militarist components.

Of the latest assault on the group, MFRR says:

MRFF's fight is against the most extreme religious zealots the United States has to offer. The same extremist mentality causing women to pray for the cancer deaths of fourteen wonderful women has also resulted in U.S. Marines posing next to a Nazi SS flag, a Marine Fighter Squadron fighting under the name and imagery of Crusaders, Air Force nuclear missile launch officers effectively being taught that "Jesus Loves Nukes", along with countless other examples of blatantly unconstitutional and maliciously inappropriate religious incursion in the military.

MRFF's significant base of Christian supporters often shares their horror at the actions undertaken by fundamentalist Christian extremists that give all Christians a bad name and awful reputation. Many Christians ask themselves, "What would Jesus do?" Would Jesus pray for the deaths of fourteen women?

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation holds that it's vitally important that this type of extremist mentality is no longer allowed to take root in our military. Whether you're Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Wiccan, Sikh, celebrate another faith tradition, or none at all, MRFF calls for you to stand together in support of this simple standard: We will not tolerate harm, threats, or abuse in the name of religion.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Secular Café: The God Complex

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
The God Complex
Apr 25th 2012, 02:23

The God Complex/Jerusalem Syndrome

http://www.wired.com/magazine/tag/god-complex/

An interesting psychological disorder. Thoughts?

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Actor accidentally hangs himself on stage while enacting 'Passion of the Christ'

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Actor accidentally hangs himself on stage while enacting 'Passion of the Christ'
Apr 24th 2012, 23:41

http://entertainment.msnbc.msn.com/_...he-christ?lite

I wonder how the theists will somehow justify this as a good-thing-because-it-was-god's-will type of bollocks. Oh, yeah....it's OK because he's in heaven now.....or judas was the bad guy, so....

Am I a bad person for laughing at it the irony????

Quote:

Brazilian actor Tiago Klimeck's artistic endeavor led to his ill-fated demise when he died by accidentally hanging himself during a stage performance of Judas in the "Passion of the Christ."


Performing for an annual Good Friday production in Itarare, Brazil, the 27-year-old was playing the role of Judas Iscariot, the apostle who betrayed Jesus and committed suicide by hanging himself from a tree, reports CNN affiliate, TV Record. While enacting the death scene, Klimeck hung for four minutes on a tree before other actors realized something was wrong.

Janaina Carvalho, a member of the theatre group, told Yahoo! News, "I started talking to Tiago and asked him to help us to take the rope. When I realized he did not answer, I and other actors call for help."

Klimeck was unconscious when removed from the tree, and immediately rushed to the hospital. Scans found the incident caused cerebral anoxia due to lack of oxygen to the brain, leading to a medically induced coma. The actor was placed on life support following the tragedy, and removed just over two weeks later on April 22 when he passed. An autopsy was scheduled for the next day.

According to TV Record, Klimeck wore a harness under his robe during the play, and had done so in performances of the show for the past three years. Police investigator Jose Victor Bassetti told the outlet that the costume equipment was on loan from the local fire department, and was being used unsupervised because the actor was familiar with it. Both the harness and the rope are now being investigated at the Criminal Institute of Sorocaba.

Some report Klimeck may have gotten material from his clothes caught on the harness cord when he jumped from a ladder during the scene.
In an interview with TV Record, Luiz Carlos Rosner, a nearby sandwich vendor, described his encounter with one of Klimeck's castmates.

"One of the actors came over to me, desperate, explaining there was someone unconscious hanging from the rope and that he wanted to cut it," recalled Rosner. "I was a little worried about giving him a knife in the middle of the crowd."

Klimeck was buried Itarare on Monday, April 23.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Family Research Council on Ad Campaign: ZOMG! Ghey Divorce!

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Family Research Council on Ad Campaign: ZOMG! Ghey Divorce!
Apr 24th 2012, 15:07

link

Heard about this on the Anderson Cooper 360 podcast. Apparently the Mike and Ike candy has the fictional 2 business partners parting ways ovewr "creative differences." The lunatic FRC sees it as promoting both homosexuality and divorce.

Quote:

In the ads for the fruit-flavored candies, surprised co-workers, celebrities and others talk about the split, saying Ike wants to pursue a career in the arts and Mike is looking to fulfill his dream of becoming a music legend.
...
There's trouble in candy land," Perkins said. "After more than 70 years together, Mike and Ike are calling it quits. The duo is staging a gay divorce as part of a new ad campaign to draw in younger customers. In this society, even candy has an agenda! From Facebook to Tumblr, the fruity pair says, 'The rumors are true. We just couldn't agree on stuff anymore.' Starting this summer, the company will spend $15 million on billboards and TV commercials that poke fun at the breakup. It's just another subtle example of society chipping away at the value of marriage. And I don't know what's more disturbing – that advertisers think divorce appeals to kids or that sexualizing candy will make people buy more. After a year-long build-up, the company will reveal if the couple reconciles. Until then, look for Mike and Ike to have a distinctly liberal flavor."
:rolling:

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Monday, 23 April 2012

Secular Café: Iranian clerics give advice on sex

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Iranian clerics give advice on sex
Apr 23rd 2012, 08:50

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...heets?page=0,0

Quote:

In the early years of the Iranian Revolution, an obscure cleric named Ayatollah Gilani became a sensation on state television by contemplating bizarre hypotheticals at the intersection of Islamic law and sexuality. One of his most outlandish scenarios -- still mocked by Iranians three decades later -- went like this:
Imagine you are a young man sleeping in your bedroom. In the bedroom directly below, your aunt lies asleep. Now imagine that an earthquake happens that collapses your floor, causing you to fall directly on top of her. For the sake of argument, let's assume that you're both nude, and you're erect, and you land with such perfect precision on top of her that you unintentionally achieve intercourse. Is the child of such an encounter halalzadeh (legitimate) or haramzadeh (a bastard)?
Such tales of random ribaldry may sound anomalous in the seemingly austere, asexual Islamic Republic of Iran. But the "Gili Show," as it came to be known, had quite the following among both the traditional classes, who were titillated by his taboo topics, and the Tehrani elite, who tuned in for comic relief. Gilani helped spawn what is now a virtual cottage industry of clerics and fundamentalists turned amateur sexologists offering incoherent advice on everything from quickies ("The man's goal should be to lighten his load as soon as possible without arousing his woman") to masturbation ("a grave, grave sin which causes scientific and medical harm")...

...in the Islamic Republic of Iran all politics may not be sexual, but all sex is political. Exhibit A is the revolution's father, the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Like all Shiite clerics aspiring to become a "source of emulation" (marja'-e taqlid), Khomeini spent the first part of his career meticulously examining and dispensing religious guidance on personal behavior and ritual purity that ranged from the mundane ("It is recommended not to hold back the need to urinate or defecate, especially if it hurts") to the surprisingly lewd.

In his 1961 religious treatise A Clarification of Questions (Towzih al-Masael), Khomeini issued detailed pronouncements on issues ranging from sodomy ("If a man sodomizes the son, brother, or father of his wife after their marriage, the marriage remains valid") to bestiality ("If a person has intercourse with a cow, a sheep, or a camel, their urine and dung become impure and drinking their milk will be unlawful")...

...Because of its religious pretensions, however, the Iranian regime is forced to spend untold millions of dollars trying to jam satellite TV broadcasts to prevent them from reaching the country's citizens -- a futile attempt to simultaneously repel the forces of both technology and human nature. In an interview with the New Yorker several years ago, an Iranian security official candidly assessed the challenge at hand:
The majority of the population is young.… Young people by nature are horny. Because they are horny, they like to watch satellite channels where there are films or programs they can jerk off to.… We have to do something about satellite television to keep society free from this horny jerk-off situation.
One might assume a country that suffers from chronic inflation and unemployment -- not to mention harsh international sanctions and a potential war over its nuclear program -- would have better things to do than discourage its youth from masturbating. Yet the regime continues to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into Chinese censorship technology to create a moral Iron Dome against political and cultural subversion, with decidedly mixed results...

...Khomeini's opposition to the shah was fueled in part by the latter's enfranchisement of women, which the ayatollah deliberately conflated with sexual decadence. In his 1970 book Islamic Governance (Hukumat-e Islami) -- which would later provide the ideological and political template for post-revolutionary Iran -- Khomeini hyperventilated that "sexual vice has now reached such proportions that it is destroying entire generations, corrupting our youth, and causing them to neglect all forms of work! They are all rushing to enjoy the various forms of vice that have become so freely available and so enthusiastically promoted."

Khomeini nonetheless reassured his liberal revolutionary compatriots -- just months before the revolution, while in Paris exile -- that "women [would be] free in the Islamic Republic in the selection of their activities and their future and their clothing." Much to its retrospective dismay, a sizable chunk of Iran's liberal intelligentsia -- both male and female -- lined up behind Khomeini, some even referring to him as an "Iranian Gandhi." Shortly after consolidating power, however, Khomeini and his disciples swiftly moved to crush opposing views and curtail female social and sartorial freedoms...

...The brutal reality is that Iranians had entrusted their national destiny to a man, Khomeini, who had spent far more time thinking about the religious penalties for fornicating with animals than how to run a modern economy...

...Interestingly, the word Khamenei employs against the potential unveiling of women -- fitna -- is the same word used to describe the opposition Green Movement that took to the streets in the summer of 2009 to protest President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's contested reelection. In other words, women's hair is itself seen as seditious and counterrevolutionary. Even so-called liberal politicians in the Islamic Republic have long fixated on this issue. Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, Iran's first post-revolutionary president, who has spent the past three decades exiled in France, reportedly once asserted that women's hair has been scientifically proven to emit sexually enticing rays. (An Iranian satirist responded with a cartoon showing a man inadvertently aroused while eating lunch at his friend's home; the culprit turned out to be an errant strand of his friend's wife's hair in the ghormeh sabzi stew, an Iranian national dish.)...

..."For Islamic Republic officials, the hijab has vast symbolic importance; it is what holds up the dam, keeping all of Iranians' other demands for social freedoms at bay," says Azadeh Moaveni, an Iranian-American author. "Relax on the hijab, they think, and all hell will break loose; next people will want to swill beer on the street and read uncensored novels. They think of it as a gateway freedom." ...

...to help accommodate the apparently incorrigibly wandering libido of the Iranian male, the country's parliament -- composed of Khamenei loyalists -- has supported sharia-sanctioned "temporary marriages" (known in Persian as sigheh) allowing men as many sexual partners as they want. The marriage contract can last as little as a few minutes, and it doesn't need to be officially registered. The man can abruptly end the sigheh when he likes, but initiating divorce is far more difficult for women. Indeed, women who stray from the sanctity of their marriages do so at grave risk -- dozens have been stoned to death in Iran for adultery...

...In a well-publicized national scandal in 2008, the Tehran police commander responsible for enforcing Iran's strict anti-vice laws, Reza Zarei, was caught nude in a brothel with six women (one of the women claimed he had asked them to pray naked in front of him). While American politicians might bounce back from such transgressions with their own television show (see: Spitzer, Eliot), the revelation of the incident reportedly led Zarei to attempt suicide while in prison...

...perhaps the seminal -- and most heartbreaking -- moment of the Green Revolution was the murder of a 26-year-old female protester, Neda Agha-Soltan, whose bloody death was caught on cell-phone camera and rendered one of the most viral videos in history. In an HBO documentary about her life, Neda's mother recalls a message that some sympathetic female Basij members relayed to Neda days before she was killed by a sniper: "Dear, please don't come out looking so beautiful.… Do us a favor and don't come out because the Basiji men target beautiful girls. And they will shoot you."

While the iconic faces of Iran's 1979 revolution were bearded, middle-aged men, Neda has come to symbolize the new face of dissent in 21st-century Iran: a young, modern, educated woman. For her opposition to the regime and to the hijab, she is the embodiment of fitna in Khamenei's eyes...

...Khamenei's vast collection of writings and speeches makes clear that the weapons of mass destruction he fears most are cultural -- more Kim Kardashian and Lady Gaga than bunker busters and aircraft carriers. In other words, Tehran is threatened not only by what America does, but by what America is: a depraved, postmodern colonial power bent on achieving global cultural hegemony. America's "strategic policy," Khamenei has said, "is seeking female promiscuity."

Khamenei's words capture the paradox and perversion of modern Iran. While dropping bombs on the Iranian regime could likely prolong its shelf-life, a regime that sees women's hair as an existential threat is already well past its sell-by date.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Secular Café: Former Tory Minister protests against tax on church renovation

Secular Café
Discuss atheism, religious apologetics, separation of church & state, theology, comparative religion and scripture.
Former Tory Minister protests against tax on church renovation
Apr 23rd 2012, 08:12

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...arns-Hurd.html

Quote:

"The Church has on the whole a pretty raw deal and this is just one example of it.

"We are governed by people who are vaguely sympathetic to the Church and would be horrified if it started to disintegrate, but don't quite understand that in order to keep it all going it needs a bit of effort and a bit of sympathy. It is taken for granted and that, I think, is a pity." ...

...VAT is already levied on repairs to churches, cathedrals and other listed buildings, but under the proposals "approved alterations" — such as new disabled access, plumbing systems and substantial changes that affect the structure — will also be subject to the 20 per cent tax.

The Government has said it was ending an "anomaly" that allowed millionaires to install swimming pools without paying VAT, leading the Church to claim that the Treasury had not "fully understood" the effect the proposals would have on their buildings.

The Church has warned that the proposals will unfairly "penalise" cathedrals and churches, which are almost entirely maintained by voluntary donations.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions