November 17, 2020

Venn Diagram of Trump's Base

RACISTS: This includes people who hate blacks, hate Jews, hate Muslims, hate Mexicans. It includes those who say it out loud, and those who just think it. The left has racists too, of course. But they didn't vote Biden because of their racism. 

RIGHT WING CHRISTIANS: People who are Pro-life. Those against gay marriage and even gay rights. People who need Israel to exist, not because it has every right to exist, but because they need Israel to exist so that Armageddon can happen. This group can also include bigoted people of any religion, but in the US it is mainly the Christian Right. 

CONSPIRACY THEORY NUTS: Remember the cartoon King of the Hill? The Dale Gribble types who believe the government is out to get them. Those who believe the Democrats will put padlocks on churches. Today, this group includes those who believe the News is Fake and that the election was rigged. It also includes those who think science is rigged. People who think evolution and or climate change is a hoax. 

PEOPLE WHO ABSOLUTELY HATE THE LEFT: I don't like the far left too much but I wouldn't vote for Trump because of that, but many do. I find the far left to be a nuisance more than a threat. People worried that voting Democrat is either a vote for Marxism (see conspiracy nuts) or a step towards Marxism or Socialism. People worried about gun rights even though the overwhelming majority of people believe that any gun purchase should be subject to background checks. People who somehow are against Universal Healthcare (Though, I can see anyone working in insurance or drug companies worried about it, I think the rest of those opposed are brainwashed by the lobby groups). This also includes some Jews who believe the Democrats are either cold to Israel or anti-Israel. 

PEOPLE CONTENT WITH THEIR FINANCES: This is probably the most rational of Trump voters. They are doing well financially and they don't want to risk change. This group also includes those who benefit from environmental restrictions being loosened. I'm going to be optimistic that this is the bulk of Trump voters. Maybe I'm too optimistic.

May 12, 2015

Where I Stand On Popular Issues

Haven't posted for quite a while. I feel a little guilty about that, but since not one person has either emailed me or tweeted me about my lack blogging, the guilt doesn't linger very long.

Pretty sure I did a piece about my worldviews a few years ago, but I'll be first to admit that my opinions can change based on new information (at least new information to me) so in some cases my views have changed, very moderately I think.

Evolution is fact. Creationists who reject evolution and especially those who reject an ancient earth are starting to turn people away from religion. A lot of that has to do with the internet. When creationists show off their willful ignorance by repeating AIG crapola they aren't just met with LOLs, usually someone with even a basic understanding of science refutes their idiocy and in many times link an article or two as well. The ass kicking is left in cyberspace for inquiring minds to see, many who have been indoctrinated with YEC nonsense. The questioning begins, and those capable of even escaping the brainwashing even for a minute begin to start doubting. And doubting and fact finding can lead to leaving religion and even *gasp* atheism. So keep up the good work internet cretards.

Global Warming aka climate change. Why is there such an overlap between evolution deniers and global warming deniers? Hmm. Aside from that, my opinion on GW is that it is happening and man is contributing to it. How much man is contributing is the only thing up for debate and it is very difficult to quantify. When I come across a denier I like to ask this: Where does man made carbon go? I don't think I've ever had that question answered yet, which I believe, says something about the deniers.

Gay marriage. Here is an old joke, but it is a foundation of my beliefs on the subject: Gay couples have every right to be just as miserable as heterosexual couples so let them get married. Scientific research coupled with common sense makes it pretty clear that in the overwhelming majority of cases, homosexuality like red headedness, is not a choice. But cretinists and even more moderate religious folk need it be a choice so they can attempt to justify their idiotic belief system. I find it really funny that it is Baptists that have the highest divorce rates and their traditional marriage claim also has no merit as the first recorded marriages were Egyptian royalty who came up with the idea of keeping wealth in the family by allowing fathers to marry daughters or brothers marrying sisters, and then marriage evolved to the purchasing of brides.

To me, marriage should be between two consenting adults...end of story. Polygamy shouldn't be recognized by the government however because it gives a people involved an extra ability to scam for government handouts.

Speaking of economics. I don't think a system that gives so much in social assistance as to make someone question if they are better off getting a paying job or staying unemployed is a very good system, and it needs to be corrected.

I think Canadian government workers, especially teachers, are over paid (especially when taking into consideration benefits). Apparently there is a lot more demand for teacher positions than supply. Economics 101 dictates that salaries are out of whack when this happens and there are other job alternatives out there. In Ontario, I cringe when they work to rule or strike. Something is broke in our system.

As for politics. All leaders who get to the top or near the top are corrupt compared to the general population. They have to be, or they won't raise enough money to become contenders. They have to suck up to their contributors and to the people most likely who will vote for them. This means they make decisions to appease oil companies, for instance, and end up punting other energy alternatives down the middle. It also means they have to "act" dumb by not admitting they believe that homosexuality is not a choice, or that climate change is a science scam, or that they either don't believe in evolution or they are agnostic about it.

In Ontario, the Liberal Party has spent years bowing to public servants by giving them more money and benefits than they would ever get in the private sector. Their party leaders could literally be caught robbing a bank and still get elected because public servants (which is a large over sized percentage of the workforce here) would be silly to vote against them.

Gun control. I wonder if more highly evolved civilizations on other planets still have guns or the necessity to have them. They are still a necessary evil on our planet, thanks to crazed leaders and crazed ideologies. Gun control seems to work well in Canada but can be improved. It can be improved an awful lot in the USA though. I just don't get their gun culture, it isn't 1776 anymore. I think someone buying a gun should go through a process that is somewhere between buying a house and buying a nuke, and there should be records for where every weapon is or should be. That would be a good start.

Abortion. This is a tough one where I can see two sides, not the religious side though. Every sperm and egg is a potential human if you really want to take an extreme position. That means that semen on a KleenX being flushed down the toilet is some sort of genocide. Pretty silly stuff. I'm against murder, but where do we draw the line? I don't think I have any memories of being inside the womb. That being stated, I tend to think that a fetus becomes a human the day that it can live without its mother outside the womb using the best technical advances. Until that time, it is completely the woman's choice.

Prayer in school or government. Alienating and just not right. No matter how universal the prayer is. And what? If you allow the prayer of one religion, you have to allow all of them. There is no time to accomplish anything after that. Prayer should be conducted anytime one wants....silently, or as loud as one wants if you in a place of worship or one's home.

Islamophobia. Stupid term because a phobia implies irrational fear. Though some phobias have evolved from being a fear to actual hate or have erroneously always implied hate. Take homophobia for instance, the true term implies that one is scared to be around gays or touch gays but in society it means hate gays in many instances. Those who call people Islamophobic, I think, are calling people Muslim haters and almost purposely trying to paint as irrational bigots, anyone who is genuinely criticizing what many Muslims believe and the actions they take. There is overlap. There are some people who hate Muslims and also hate their beliefs and actions. However, it is completely rational to fear and take steps to prevent what Islam brings to the table. You have to have your head in your ass not to.

Israel. Israel exists. What is happening in France right now, justifies its necessity to be a Jewish majority state at this time. Israel, like every country on this planet got its start using might and negotiations. If one is against Israel, they might as well be against every country in the universe. I'd like to see a two state solution, but the Palestinian side seems to only want a one state Muslim majority state or just the annihilation of Israel. And it is unreasonable to invoke Right of Return when refugees are to include children, grand children and great children of refugees (where the children weren't even born in Israel). They are the only ones who define refugees this way. There is so much propaganda out there and so much hypocrisy, I feel a need to defend Israel even though I have no intention of ever going there.

Taxation. I believe in paying for infrastructure and education, etc. I just think the taxation system is overly complicated and should have been simplified yesterday. I can't worry if accountants would lose their jobs because of much needed reform, but it should be simple as to what you make, and what you can deduct (per whatever industry, just allow a certain percentage deduction and it doesn't matter if the money was actually spent or if more money was spent, etc.).

Prostitution and drugs. Prostitution and many drugs should be legalized, not government regulated but enforced vigorously. Hard addictive drugs like cocaine and heroine should be banned outright (too much social cost and crime comes from these drugs). Large fines and much tougher jail sentences should be imposed as a deterrence. Other than that, the government should have a really decent source of new income through taxing hookers and pot.

Relationships. Don't waste time with people who bring you down or are negative a lot more than they are positive. The secret to a long marriage is to be able to admit you are wrong even when there is no chance in hell you are wrong.

Death Penalty. I believe that certain scum should be vaporized ASAP. I can see not sentencing domestic murderers who may have been driven by emotion to death. I can also very much see not sentencing those convicted solely on circumstantial evidence to death. But when there is no doubt I'm all for it. Partly deterrence and partly vengeance. You don't have to love me for thinking this way. It wouldn't bother me at all if the likes of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was impaled on pay for view (in fact, I see the practicality of it on a few levels). As for Sister Helen Prejean who says that someone who is incapable of killing someone who is on death row with their own hands must be against the death penalty, well, I could never kill an animal but I still eat meat. The latter statement means I'm not perfect. I really can't stand the slaughter of animals but I don't think I've ever turned away a bacon sandwich. And when it comes to game hunters I'm in Ricky Gervais' camp. There is something off with game hunters, I can't respect them.

God. There is no evidence for God or anything supernatural. I'm truly open to evidence, but I'm as certain as one can be, there never will be evidence for either God or supernatural events. I believe we have evolved a susceptibility to believe supernatural explanations, it is in our hard wiring. Even I catch myself sometimes thinking that if I move or get up during a rally from a sports team I want to win that I will some how effect the outcome. Totally irrational and I usually snap out of it quicker the older I get.

Moses, the Exodus, Noah's Ark and Jesus. No evidence points me in the direction there was a historical Jesus or Moses. Noah's Ark story is ridiculous, and there is a lot of evidence that indicates other things happened in the time that the Exodus was supposed to happen, and nothing outside the bible to back it up either. Just as every new scientific and archaeological finding fits evolution and an ancient earth, every new finding seems to put more and more distance between reality and a historical Jesus or Moses.

Moonbats. Often very functional and even intelligent in a lot of areas. However they are screwed up in the head when figuring out justice. They tend to automatically believe that the victim is always the person with the least, no matter why a conflict happened and who started the conflict. Blaming everyone but the perpetrator. They blame upbringing, the government, society for even the most heinous actions by a person or a group. They are the first to cry out Islamophobia and the first to go after Israel because the person with the least is always the victim. I'm not sure if they got too much breast milk when they were kids or too little, but either way, I firmly believe that those who commit heinous acts are responsible for their own action.













August 8, 2014

What The Hell Is Wrong With Some Of You

The Israel Gaza conflict sure has me spending a lot more time on Twitter than ever before.  Very disillusioned  about the amount of atheists that I've had to either stop following or blocking because of their absolutely nonsensical hypocritical attitude towards Israel.

Sick of reading what Israel shouldn't do when it comes to civilian deaths.  Ask one of these Moonbats what Israel should do, and you get either a smart ass answer, shrugs or crickets chirping.  This proves that atheists do not necessarily have to be critical thinkers.  I've lost complete respect for PZ Myers, for example.  His use of terms like apartheid and genocide show he is a misinformed rhetorical assmonkey.  And now cognitive dissonance has put him over the edge, he will forever be anti-Israel in order to fool himself into believing he is a sane rational individual.

Thankfully, there are many atheists who get it, in fact, the majority do.  I would hate to live in a world full of atheist Moonbats.

I think anyone with an ounce of humanity hates to see children, women and other innocents dying because they are victims of being under control of genocidal terrorists (read the Hamas charter) who use them as human shields.  But Israel is a sovereign country. Yeah, its birth wasn't perfect to say the least, but neither was any countries birth on this planet today.  Israel has a right to defend itself when getting bombed.  What are they supposed to do?  Let the bombs come in, hope the Iron Dome intercepts them or that the bombs do little damage if not intercepted?  Is that reasonable to ask of Israel or any country?

As for disproportional response.  In a war, this has to be the stupidest concept out there.  You don't play for a tie.  The object is to win the war.  In Israel's case, it is to get Hamas to stop firing rockets into Israel.  I'm not advocating Israel carpet bomb Gaza, but use enough force to end the conflict.  This doesn't mean firing a home made rocket for each home made rocket Hamas fires into Israel.

Lets put things another way.  ISIS is cornering various ethnicities right now giving them the option to convert or die.  The USA isn't being threatened, but humanity is.  If disproportional response is to be adhered to, the USA should do nothing.  Is that what Moonbats really believe in this case?  I guess proportionate response would be to capture ISIS members and give them the option of converting to Christianity or get their head chopped off.  Again, it such a stupid concept, yet Moonbats, Jihadists, and Jew haters expect it from Israel.

Countering some propaganda

Hamas has no choice but to fire from civilian territories.  Sorry, but there is plenty of rural area that Hamas could wage war from.  Problem is that Israel would easily be able to take them out, and Hamas would have a difficult time gaining Western sympathy if children don't die:


Propaganda maps that many Moonbats seem to fall for based on the faulty premise that Palestine was Arab land prior to 1948.  Fact is that Arabs owned around 21% (close to 80% of that number was owned by absentee Arab land owners.  Jews owned 7-8%, and the bulk of the land was state land.  The fact that Palestine was not sovereign means that land was in control of the British at the time of the Partition Plan.  Not Arab land by default!

One more thing.  When it comes to the Zionist Expansion canard.  If you believe that, and this map doesn't make you feel silly, you might need psychiatric help:


July 9, 2014

What Would The USA Do If Mexico Attacked?

A Zogby poll from 2003 found that 58% of Mexicans believe that the Southwestern USA belongs to Mexico.  Now, what if The Mexican Nationalist Front started sending suicide bombers into Texas and then started lobbing a few hundred bombs a month into that state as well in an attempt to get Texas back and wipe Texans off the map?

True, this scenario is highly unlikely, but it is playing out in Israel.  Yet, there are many people who believe Israel shouldn't retaliate (mostly Far Left Moonbats, Jihadists, or Jew haters).

If Texas was attacked, and the Mexican government turned a blind eye to the attacks, there is absolutely no doubt that the USA would be targeting anyone having anything to do with the invasion, and "excessive" force would be used.  There would be few people in the US objecting if Mexican deaths outnumbered US deaths by numbers as high as 1000-1 either.  And the US wouldn't stop until there would be a complete stoppage of bombings and a compliance agreement from Mexico that will pretty much prevent the same thing from happening at a later date.

Initially, if attacks were happening, I could see the US doing its best to make sure that Mexico didn't receive weaponry from other countries as well.  Mexico is tougher to blockade than Gaza, but the US would be doing as much as they could that way.

Back to Israel.  Lunatics somehow believe that Israel should just allow bombings because the Palestinians miss with so many of the bombs.  And the justifications go further than that.  Many loons believe that Israel shouldn't retaliate because it has no right to exist anyway.

Playing whack-a-mole for a minute, every single nation on this earth was created by either might and/or negotiations.  But for some reason, Israel should be different.  Demographics change everywhere, but for some reason, they shouldn't have changed in Palestine.  It is OK that Brazil has over 10 million ethnic Arabs, and it is OK that Dearborn, Michigan has a Muslim majority.  You see, it is OK for Arabs and Muslims to go to Western Lands, but Jews to the Middle East?

Back in 1948, when Israel became a sovereign nation, there was a Jewish majority in the Partitioned portion of Palestine that was to become the Jewish state.  The Arabs rejected this to the point that started a war immediately, and lost.  A few more wars and a few more losses, and Israel is still standing.  Imagine if the Arabs won even one war?  The few Jews left if any would be enjoying Dhimmi status at best.

True, the was that followed the creation of Israel in 1948 created refugees.  It created Arab refugees who Arab states didn't want to take in, and it created Jewish refugees from other Arab nations who Israel happily took in.  But the number of total refugees wasn't even 20% the total refugees created in 1947 when the Muslim state of Pakistan was created.  The lunatic far left seems ignorant over the fact that Pakistan's creation caused over 5 million people to be displaced.  I guess it is OK to them because it didn't involve Jews.

February 9, 2014

Pat Robertson Is Getting Wiser With Age

I'm pleasantly surprised that Old Age Creationist Pat Robertson seems to have taken another leap of fact.  He is now officially embraces Theistic Evolution (evolution happens as per God's plan).  This is the same official position as the Vatican.

Yes, there are quite a few people out there still who believe in an ancient earth and universe, but also believe man was poofed here by God around 10,000 years ago.  Of course, there are those, like Ken Ham, who believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that evolution is nonsense.  These Young Earth Creationists are laughing stocks, and apparently have become embarrassments to the Pat Robertson's of the the world.  

The majority of Americans who support the the Republican Party are YECs.  And the Republican politicians have to play to these fools.

Anyway, here is Pat Robertson laying into the YECs:

December 24, 2013

To Quack or Not To Quack

It isn't shocking that anyone on the cast of Duck Dynasty has religious views that I find repugnant.  And it isn't a surprise that head Duckman Phil Robertson was tricked into stating them in a not so eloquent way either.

What really gets me is that so many people think this is a free speech issue.  It isn't even close.  Free Speech means everyone in the West has the right to say anything they want without having to worry about going to prison.  Now, we don't have 100% Free Speech because certain things like inciting hate and libel and a few other things (depending on the country) could mean jail time, but the simple hate speech uttered by Robertson doesn't fall upon this category.

Free speech isn't free from consequences.  You can say something offensive to a neighbour and it could cause ill will for years.  And of course, when it comes to employment, if you say something that a private employer doesn't like, they have the right to show you the door.  If you say something they don't care about or are indifferent to, but it potentially costs the company money, they can fire you for that too.

It is a pretty simple concept, but it seems many on the Right don't have a clue what Free Speech is.  And then there is Sarah Palin who acknowledged that Martin Bashir's job entailed being mindful of what he said, so his firing/quitting was justifiable, but somehow, the ugly Left is taking away Free Speech from the Duck Family.  She really is a ridiculous person.

I like the way society is going, regardless if Duck Dynasty is restored to full cast and status.  Hate speech might be free, but it isn't tolerated as much anymore, and I think the rational world is starting to pick up on the idea that certain religious people seem to follow a group of pretty intolerant Gods.

November 12, 2013

Right Wing Watch Loses Youtube Account Because Of "Bogus" Cretard Claim

One of my favorite sites these days is Right Wing Watch.   This site is not to be confused with sites like Jewwatch or American Thinker, which write opinion pieces mostly based on conspiracy theories.  Every time someone stubs a toe, Jewwatch blames the Jews, while American Thinker blames Obama for it.

Right Wing Watch mainly links to articles that let Fundy Cretards, mostly homophobes, bury themselves with their own words.  Much of the fun loving believers RRW links to, are aligned with the GOP and/or Teabaggers.  Many are politicians who, believe it or not, actually have a chance of winning seats (only in America...and Saudi Arabia).

Of course, political types say lots and lots of things all the time, but for some reason, when they tackle anything religious, they tend to stick their feet down their own throats.

So what got RRW banned on Youtube?  Showing a video of former Navy Chaplain Gordon James “Chaps” Klingenschmitt doing an interview with  Family Values Chairman, the whacked out religious bigot, Will Perkins.  In the interview, which can be seen here, Perkins attempts to explain that homosexuals don't really want to get married for their welfare, they just want access to children, because most gays don't procreate, they must have something more sinister in mind, to recruit children to become homosexuals.

God set it up, homosexuals don't reproduce, they recruit, and mankind can't go on if homosexuality was normalized, because, usually gays don't produce children, so mankind would die off.   YJCMTSU.  Maybe Perkins should simply be asked about ants.  Most don't reproduce, but most take care of the youngsters, and I don't think we have to worry about a decline in the ant population any time soon. 

Klingenschmitt is now a candidate for State office in Colorado, so he apparently doesn't want these types of videos coming back at him.  Moderates most likely will be absolutely disgusted with him if his real thoughts got too much exposure, and these kind of things make GOP imbeciles losers in elections, thankfully.  And I think in the future, the more people think, the less of a hold the Religious Right will have on politics.  C'mon guys, Jesus even said, if you want to pray, lock yourself in a closet and pray all you want, but keep the juvenile fairy tale stuff out of the public's eye.
now a candidate for state representative in Colorado - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bogus-copyright-claims-gordon-klingenschmitt-take-down-right-wing-watch-youtube-account#sthash.MU6KQJXk.dpuf

now a candidate for state representative in Colorado - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bogus-copyright-claims-gordon-klingenschmitt-take-down-right-wing-watch-youtube-account#sthash.MU6KQJXk.dpuf
now a candidate for state representative in Colorado - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bogus-copyright-claims-gordon-klingenschmitt-take-down-right-wing-watch-youtube-account#sthash.MU6KQJXk.dpuf

Reality is, and reality is a tough concept for these Fundy Cretards, that our population has been growing and growing and growing, and if not for the odd war and famine, there is a good chance we would be overpopulated today.  But eventually, it is inevitable that our earth becomes overpopulated in the not too distant future, barring a war, meteor strike, major disaster brought on by climate change, famine, or the second coming of Zombie Jeebus (actually the first coming, since he never existed in the first place).  But then again, the Cretards don't care about the future of the planet, because they "know" the Zombie is coming back, so screw doing anything about climate change.  Yet they are worried about gays getting married and adopting kids...there is nothing consistent in their thinking.

Anyway, I doubt the Ridiculous Religious Right can shutdown Right Wing Watch's website, so check it out.

 

August 17, 2013

Ray Comfort Is Nothing But A Snake Oil Salesman

Ray Comfort gets more attention than he deserves. His latest video "masterpiece" Evolution versus God is just another feeble attempt by creationists to poke holes in evolution. Their game is that if evolution has even a tiny hole, it can't be true, and that means the literal bible is true. Problem is that this video, just like all creationist videos, find holes that aren't even there.

Comfort has had evolution explained to him many times on talk shows and through exchanges, but he still appears not to get it. On top of that, the explanations by scientists in his newest piece, wound up on the editing floor. In other words, not only is Comfort willfully ignorant, he is also willfully deceptive.

Even the premise that if evolution is true God isn't is false, unless you are a bible literalist. Of course, there is no evidence for any God, but you have to figure that if a God could have made man from sand, he/she/it is also capable of devising a plan to evolve man from a series of other species that came before and there are some scientists who actually believe that.

I'm not going to post the video, instead, I'll post a Youtube Atheist's rebuttal to it:


Jaclyn Glenn has also put out a video explaining while Jesus most probably is nothing but a fictional character (sound familiar?). The only thing she is missing in the video is commenting on the fact that there is no contemporary evidence Jesus ever walked this planet:

August 2, 2013

Freedom From Religion Foundation Have Gone Insane

I didn't want to blog about this, but since the Freedom From Religion is taking a stance of willful ignorance, by not backing down despite hearing and viewing actual facts as to why their stance against the Holocaust Memorial in Ohio is simply wrong, I just have to add my two cents.

Nobody is more for separation of church and state than me, but when it comes to the Star Of David, an idiot can research it and find it is neither biblical or religious. Jews are a religion and/or ethnicity. When Hitler murdered Jews in Nazi Europe, he didn't ask if they were religious, let alone if they believed in God. So the argument that the Star violates of the First Amendment or separation of church and state is hooey, nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't promote Judaism, nobody is going to see the Memorial and say, the USA has become a Jewish nation, nor will it in any way make anyone want to convert to Judaism.

David Silverman, President of American Atheists usually gets things right, but he overcompensates against Jews for being born an ethnic Jew (some sort of dissociation psychological disorder I think), and common sense gets thrown aside.

Here is a rational atheist, David Fincke's (Camel With Hammer) take on the subject.

Here is an irrational rant by David Silverman:


When a Fox News hot blonde wins a debate, it is time to reassess your position Silverman.

His point, and only point it seems, that more than one group were Holocaust victims and that they should be represented in the same way is ridiculous, and here is why: The Nazis put out a lot of propaganda, but the only films I remember seeing were those which made Jews out to be subhuman and the cause of every wrong in the world. There weren't films about blacks, gays, or Gypsies, just Jews.

Films like this, the Eternal Jew, not the Eternal Homosexual, were used to get the German people to go along with Hitler's plan:


As for the Star of David making the Memorial look like a synagogue, again just pure foolishness by Silverman. Did the Stars that Jews were forced to wear make the Jewish people look like synagogues.

Freedom from Religion Foundation, wake up and GET A LIFE!

Another excellent read on the subject: Atheists against the Ohio Holocaust memorial: How not to fight for separation of church and state


June 20, 2013

Wrong Rev, Non Believers Are Not Confused

Went to a funeral yesterday. My neighbour's brother died in a car accident. I met the him a few times at BBQs. He seemed quiet and nice. Struck down in his mid fifties. He got ripped off, he should have been on this planet longer.

The funeral service, unfortunately, was not about him very much, but was focused on Jesus and the afterlife.

The Rev told the crowd of 300 mourners that we were not there to mourn, but to embrace the fact that the deceased guy was now in heaven enjoying eternal bliss.

He might have been right about me, I wasn't really there to mourn, because I really didn't know the guy. But I wasn't there to celebrate nonsense either. I was there out of respect to my neighbour, and to support my wife who is good friends with the neighbour.

I found the "sermon" to border on the ridiculous. Rev mentioned non believers. He said that we are confused about life and death. I'm not confused at all. Science pretty well answers everything out there regarding life, and the idea of an afterlife simply makes no sense and has no evidence supporting it.

I really bit my lip, as I stood right in the back of the second room (big turnout), when Rev told everyone how we know Christianity is the right religion. Of course, it is because the Gospels tell us so. The same way it is the Gospels which tell us that there is eternal life. Rev used the story of Lazarus to make his point. I found it odd that he didn't know if the name of the sister that Jesus said "he is the resurrection" to was Mary or Martha. You'd figure he has used the example many times. It actually motivated me to look it up when I went home. Turns out that Lazarus had two sisters, one Martha and one Mary, but it was Martha who Jesus spoke with, according to the myth. I'm going to give Rev credit. I think he pretended not to know on purpose, to get his flock talking, and to get his non flock, like me, to look into it more. Or maybe he just didn't know.

So that is the Christian's evidence for life after death: A book written at least 200 years "after the fact." What I really giggled to myself about was when he said that Jesus bringing Lazarus back to life, proves the afterlife, and that Jesus could walk into this room right now if he wanted to.

Weird, that these people buy into a crock like this. Jesus apparently had the need to prove the afterlife just the one time, and ever since, doesn't seem to have the need, despite the growth of Islam, but more importantly the rise of the dreaded atheist population.

When you listen to stories from the bible from the perspective that they are children's fables for adults, it all makes too much sense.

The reality is that there is no more contemporary evidence for Jesus than there is for unicorns or Leprechauns. In fact, the earliest known Christian bible mentions nothing of a resurrection. The first believers in Jesus were Gnostic. He was a myth, so was Moses. When you die that is it. I'm OK with it. As time goes by, I'm more OK with it. Live your life to the fullest, it is your only one.

I did agree with Rev when making a point about forgiveness. Most of the things that we have anger over are trivial. Forget about it. But there are some things that are unforgivable (like terrorist acts), and even the Rev should acknowledge that, but he didn't, because it would hurt his narrative that pretty much whatever is done on earth is trivial because it is only a speck of time in relation to your eternal life, but you need to accept Jesus to ensure that life.

From the back of the service I could easily notice who was praying and who wasn't. I'd say that 1 out of 12 or 13 didn't bow their heads at times they were told to. Were they atheists or simply non religious? I don't know. They weren't likely to be Muslims or Jews, not in my neck of the woods. My wife, who is atheist (at least that is what she tells me) did bow her head, but she explained it was to not bring attention to herself. Makes no sense, because anyone who catches you is obviously not bowing their head and closing their eyes like a good little boy or girl is supposed to.

One last thing. Guys do think about sex at inappropriate. Near the end of the service, I had a vision of the Sopranos scene when Tony humps a Fundamentalist Christian at the work place over a desk. I don't know what prompted that, but a few hours later, we were all stunned by the news of the death of James Gandolfini. Was that some sort of sign? Now that would be confusing.

February 28, 2013

Fox News Employs An Atheist

John Stossel may state he is agnostic, but he is as atheist as they come. It is surprising to me that Fox News would allow someone with a rational overall point of view to have pretty good air time:


Since the Pope and the Catholic church are back in the news, it is a good time to revisit the classic Louis CK exposure mockumentary about the Vatican:

February 4, 2013

41% of US Democrats Are Young Earth Creationists

I read an article by Michael Shermer, The Liberal's War On Science. I'm not going critique the article, just the title.

The paragraph that got my eye was this:

A 2012 Gallup poll found that “58 percent of Republicans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years,” compared with 41 percent of Democrats. A 2011 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 81 percent of Democrats but only 49 percent of Republicans believe that Earth is getting warmer.

I'm going to assume that this poll includes the old age creationists as well, because it is my understanding that most of them accept dinosaurs were here first, but do not accept evolution because they too believe God created man less than 10,000 years ago.

Because of its anti-science platform, the GOP attracts Creationists, those against gay marriage, and those who want prayer in school. Since around 48% of Americans don't accept evolution, it is not shocking that 58% of Republicans are willfully ignorant YECs. Based on the US anti-evolution numbers, it isn't a shock that 41% of Democrats are YECs as well.

The biggest problem I have is that lets not confuse all Democrats with pro science liberals. Sure, most pro science liberals vote Democrat, but there are a lot of reasons to be Democrat, especially if you are poor and struggling. And yes, there is a correlation with being poor and being poorly educated.

How many welfare moms are going to vote Republican? Not many. Yet my guess is that many are churchgoing and/or collectively are not as well educated on average.

There are others who vote Democrat. Union members generally stay away from the GOP. And then you have government workers. It is natural to protect your livelihood and/or your personal needs ahead of your religious and worldview beliefs in many cases, especially if you lean towards the idea that government and religion should be separated.

There are gay Republicans, but not very many. But being born gay doesn't mean you automatically except evolution over the fairy tale ideas that God poofed Adam and Eve on this planet.

The main thing is that the Democrat platform and its leaders stand for separation of church and state light years more than the Republicans do. But not all Democrats are Progessives, or Liberals or whatever other name the marginalized Right wants to attach to someone who accepts reality versus those who don't.

What I find encouraging is that 42% of Republicans are not knuckledraggers when it comes to evolution.

January 9, 2013

Pat Condell On The Palestinians

Pat Condell hit another home run in the following video where he points out that Palestinians get a free pass for their behaviour because they are not held to the same standards as Israeli Jews:

Condell blames the collective attitude by the West as racism. The West doesn't expect Palestinians and other Arabs to behave like normal Western human beings would.

I agree with that this is a major element but I also agree with Why Evolution Is True that there is a "traditional sympathy of liberals for the perceived underdog."

I also believe that there is also a faction of anti-semites within the Far Left that overlook "inconvenient facts" when it comes to Israel.

If you don't agree with Condell, then why is Israel such a focus of hatred and criticism when a lot more deaths and murders or innocents have come out of Darfur and more recently Syria? It is because we collectively expect barbaric behaviour from Arabs and/or Muslims. And besides, there aren't many if any Jews involved in the Syria or Darfur conflicts either.

December 11, 2012

Oh My, That Moron Good Science For You Has A Forum

This anti-evilutionist imbecile gets an A+ for determination, and an A++++ for wilful ignorance.

I first came across his lunacy when he commented on a few of my Youtube videos. I was hoping for good of the world that he either figured out how wrong he was or that he choked on a baloney sandwich. I could live with either outcome. Unfortunately, he is still out there polluting the earth with real bad science.

Check out his forum, but I'm warning you, your head might explode.

BTW, here is his Youtube Channel.

November 9, 2012

GOP In A Catch 22 Position


Now that the election is finally over, the Republicans need to reflect on how they can win in 2016. I don't think there is much of an argument that the rape comments cost them a few votes, but that might just have been the tip of the iceberg.

Many moderates and independents realize that when it comes to foreign issues and domestic economics, there isn't going to be much variance when it comes to the end result of policies by either party, though you wouldn't know it with all the rhetoric.
When Romney was unknowingly taped regarding his 47% comment, he also said that when it comes to China and the Israeli conflict, the best one can do is just kick the ball down the field and hope that the problems sort themselves up over time. As for economics, cycles are generally out of the President's hands too, and cycles trump policy.

Most business people realize that the fiscal conservatism is usually much healthier in the long run than big government, though when it comes to bubbles and bad economic cycles, neither policy types help much. The GOP definitely appeals to those who understand economics and business, but that is a growing minority in the free world.

I believe the GOP understands this, and that is why they have such a hard time dropping the social issues which give them little to no shot now or going forward to win a Presidential election.

Humanity has evolved too much, and the Religious Right simply pisses off far too many people with their anti-women's right nonsense and even their anti-gay rights nonsense. The fact 45% of Americans still do not accept evolution is comical, but I expect that number to only drop in the future as creationists continue to have their asses handed to them, especially now that social media makes it very easy to quickly refute their idiocy.

However, the Religious Right will never vote for a the Democrats right now because the Republicans, in their charter, are strictly Right To Life, no exceptions. They would rather vote for someone who wears magical underwear while converting dead Jews than a Godless Muslim from Kenya any day of the week.

But as less and less people consider themselves to be religious, and science continues to show more evidence that homosexuality is created in the womb the overwhelming majority of the time, the Religious Right will continue to make it impossible for the GOP to win a major election.

The big question is if the GOP were to drop social issues, would they pick up more moderates and independents to make up for the losses from the Religious Right. They could drop their public stance on abortion and gay marriage, and still hang on to the Armageddon crowd, by being perceived as more pro-Israel than the Democrats (which is the case, though it might just be hogwash as both parties are in kick the ball mode). The Religious Right needs a Jewish majority in Israel or the prophecy of Jesus' Second Coming will be screwed up.

The reality is that the most famous person who never existed, Jesus Christ, would vote Democrat if he could vote today. He was definitely portrayed as a Socialist in the bible, not quite a Communist though, but still he would be compelled to vote for the left leaning party.

So take social issues away, and think what Jesus would do, the Democrats could steal many Religious voters. You know charity and make sure your neighbour doesn't starve and the rest of that empathetic and sympathetic stuff.

It is tough choice to let go of such a big base, but one thing does hold true in politics when you take social issues out of the equation, if the economic cycle is trending downwards, the opposing party has a great chance to win. That is what the GOP needs to happen in 2016, but in the their case, they would lose because of their current need to appease the Christian Taliban. They need to cut ties.



September 19, 2012

Early Christians Invented Jesus, Some Even Invented A Wife

Jesus, like every religious figure who allegedly performed supernatural feats, never existed. To me it becomes more evident each day. Just think of the recent claim that Jesus might have been married because it implies it in a newly found document. Here you have something written "after the fact" that gives Jesus a wife. This means that at least one person, and most probably a whole sect, believed Jesus had a ball and chain.

What I'm trying to get to is that it isn't hard to invent a fact and then have a bunch of people believe that fact over even a generation or two, especially back at a time when word of mouth was king. Hoaxes still go on today, and are bought by millions until proven false....back then, there was no incentive to prove an extraordinary claim false, and even if they wanted to, the early Christians couldn't falsify much.

What they could do was pick and choose which fairy tale story fit their agenda at the time. That is why some versions regarding Jesus made it in the bible and others did not.

The same word of mouth nonsense had people believing in Gods like Mercury and Thor at various times. Do you think many Christians or Jews or Muslims believe in those stories? Probably close to zero. They rightfully dismiss them as nonsensical.

Reality is that there is no historical evidence for Jesus, Moses, the Exodus, etc. Lots of counter evidence that go against those stories though, but no evidence to support them.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for God to magically open up the fridge and float a cold pop to my computer desk.

September 5, 2012

Bill Nye The Science Tells It Like It Is

Not the greatest speaker in the world, or at least he made it seem like this wasn't scripted, just a natural dialogue. Anyway he appears naturally frustrated and partially embarrassed that the US has so many evolution deniers.

Over 4 million hits on Youtube for this two minute video...impressive. Over 140.000 comment. Well, someone sure hit a nerve.

I've always believed that teaching creationism to children and even brainwashing a child about one's own religion is a form of child abuse. I'm with Bill Nye on this. If adults want to remain willfully ignorant, let them. But don't take down the kiddies with you:

August 6, 2012

What Would It Take For Me To Believe In God

Many a times I've encountered a silly creationist who tries to counter the what would it take for you to accept evolution with a what would it take for you to believe in God retort.

It seems that for many a creationist, they would need to see a monkey give birth to a human. In other words, there is no chance they'll accept reality. I'm not as rigid in my disbelief, all I need is some evidence. Even evidence of the supernatural could lead me to a vague state of theism.

For example, I'm sitting at my desk in my home office, how about God or some other invisible boogie man opening my little bar fridge up right now and float a Pepsi across the room? I'll even open it myself.

There are cameras everywhere, how come there is no credible supernatural event caught on camera? I wonder why? Still, I'm open to it happening, it is in our genes to buy into miraculous explanations. Lightning couldn't be properly explained by our ancestors, so it had to have a supernatural explanation. Unfortunately today, there seems to be a scientific explanation for everything.

One more slightly related thing. I kind of think that those who pray understand either deep down or even closer to the surface, that prayer doesn't work. Why is it that it is acceptable to pray for a cure when it come to internal disease, or even praying for some good fortune or a job, but nobody ever prays that someone who loses a limb will have their limb grow back. Is that something God just can't do, or does God only do things that can also have a scientific explanation?



July 1, 2012

As The US Election Nears, Evolution Is Likely To Be Discussed

So far, Mitt Romney has pretty much avoided having to appease the Religious Right. In fact, he has their vote sewn up because the RR is so much anti-Obama, his opposing candidate only needs to accept Jesus as being a magical type of guy to win them over.

This means that Romney, if he is smart, could actually go after a left leaning Republican as his VP nomination.

Still, there will be some appeasing. It will interesting to see if Romney flip flops on his acceptance of evolution. He is bound to be asked again.

Anyway, this Seth Macfarlane short is definitely worthy of sending to your anti-evolution friends and relatives. Enjoy:

June 11, 2012

Will Mitt Romney Flip Flop On Evolution?

Considering the Daffy Duckonian beliefs the Mormons have when it comes to their religion, especially its roots, I find it encouraging that they can actually allow for evolution to have happened.

5 years ago, Mitt Romney gave his views regarding evolution in a NY Times article:

“I believe that God designed the universe and created the universe,” Mr. Romney said in an interview this week. “And I believe evolution is most likely the process he used to create the human body.”

He was asked: Is that intelligent design?

“I’m not exactly sure what is meant by intelligent design,” he said. “But I believe God is intelligent and I believe he designed the creation. And I believe he used the process of evolution to create the human body.”

While governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Romney opposed the teaching of intelligent design in science classes.

“In my opinion, the science class is where to teach evolution, or if there are other scientific thoughts that need to be discussed,” he said. “If we’re going to talk about more philosophical matters, like why it was created, and was there an intelligent designer behind it, that’s for the religion class or philosophy class or social studies
class.”

Intelligent design is typically defined as the claim that examination of nature points to the work of an intelligent designer, as opposed to the utterly random, naturalistic processes that are taught as part of evolutionary theory. Critics have called intelligent design a thinly disguised version of creationism, which takes a literal approach to the creation account in Genesis, that the earth was created in six days and is less than 10,000 years old.

Mr. Romney said he was asked about his belief in evolution when he was interviewed by faculty members for highest honors designations before his graduation from Brigham Young University.

He told his interviewers that he did not believe there was a “conflict between true science and true religion,” he said.

“True science and true religion are on exactly the same page,” he said. “they may come from different angles, but they reach the same conclusion. I’ve never found a conflict between the science of evolution and the belief that God created the universe. He uses scientific tools to do his work.”

The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints has no definitive position on evolution, and church leaders have disagreed on the issue over the years.

Mr. Romney said his answer was satisfactory to faculty members. “They teach evolution at B.Y.U.,” he said.

The big question is how much is Romney going to change or fuzz his words from 2007 to kiss up to the Religious Right. I'm hoping he won't, but I doubt it. One thing that is almost for certain, his selection for Vice President will not accept evolution at all. Sad, but that is how America politics rolls.