Some Questions for Rick Santorum

To: Rick Santorum

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 16:22 clearly states it is to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19: 19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it realty necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24: 10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in- laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Sincerely,

Your devoted fan.

Rick Santorum: Hypocritical Shitbag

Rick Santorum, somehow now a leading candidate for the Republican nomination, is a hypocritical shitbag of the highest order. Watch this video first.

Now, of course, if you have been following the parade of idiots clamoring for the Republican nod, this statement of Santorum's against all abortions even in the case of rape and incest is probably not surprising.

But, did you know his wife had an abortion?

In October, 1996, his wife Karen had a second trimester abortion. They don’t like to describe it that way. In his 2004 interview with Terry Gross, Santorum characterizes the fetus, who must be treated as an autonomous person, as a practically a gunslinging threat, whom the mother must murder in self-defense. Karen has had to justify her decision to save her own life by explaining that if she died her other children would have lost a mother.

This hairball is the second worst (Michelle Bachmann ranks number one) of the fools running on the Republican side... and his ascent needs to be slapped down hard and fast. I'd rather Newt win than this troglodyte (which is saying something, because I despise Gingrich, too).

God's Favorite

This is a wonderful graphic that helps to depict our place in the cosmos.

Religion vs. Religion

In less than a month, Pastor Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center in Florida plans to host "Burn a Quran Day" to mark the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

The pastor, author of the book "Islam is of the Devil," is using the burning to urge American Christians to "stand up" to what he describes as a monolithic Muslim threat. A Facebook page for the event has accrued thousands of "likes" and Jones has said people have been mailing him Qurans to burn.

What to think of this one... well, there sure is a lot of ridiculous bluster here. Jones is using a stupid tactic (burning books) to raise attention. Instead of getting his message out, he will be equated with censorship a la Fahrenheit 451. Of course, there is an element of that in these books burning (it would seem that this pastor would be thrilled if Islam were to be censored), but I think the larger meaning of this burning event is as follows: Christianity is being threatened by Islam and there are militant factions within Islam that are violently anti-American.

Of course, Jones and his ilk say it much more offensively than that, and that is what hides some actual viable criticism of Islam (and, oh, yes, there is MUCH to criticize). Furthermore, the city of Gainesville has not given the chruch permission to burn, but the church said it will do so anyway. I hope they all get thrown in jail for that.

The other side seems to be a bunch of whining babies, making statements like "Jones' burning will have great symbolic significance to a Muslim world already feeling under attack by the United States. It will cause undue harm to U.S. relations with the Muslim world and particularly the war effort." Ridiculous. We are to worry about how a free expression of thoughts and ideas (albeit a patently stupid one) impacts on the very people that are being targeted by the event?

So, bottom line, there is more stupidity here than you can shake a stick at. Maybe if we wait around long enough the various religions of the world will destroy themselves. That'd be fine with me... except, of course, that they'd probably take most of us down with them.

For the time being, I think I'll just sit back and laugh at everyone involved in this one -- both sides.

Unconstitutional State Constitutions

Texas' Bill of Rights Section 4:
" RELIGIOUS TESTS: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

Tennessee's Bill of Rights: Article 9:
Section 2. " No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."

South Carolina's Constitution, Article 4 Section 2:
"Person denying existence of Supreme Being not to hold office. No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."

North Carolina's Constitution, Article 6 Sec. 8:
" Disqualifications of office. The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...."

Maryland's Bill of Rights: Article 36:
" That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefore either in this world or in the world to come."

Why these are all unconstitutional:
Article VI, section 3 of the United States Constitution

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Them There Atheists Are Haters

Some conservative commentators are accusing the Obama administration of inviting "hate groups" into the White House by holding a meeting with a coalition of secularist and atheist groups.

Officials from the Justice and Health and Human Services departments met Friday with representatives of the Secular Coalition for America, an umbrella group that includes American Atheists and the Council for Secular Humanism. The coalition called it "the first time in history a presidential administration has met for a policy briefing with the American nontheist community."

President Barack Obama was not scheduled to make an appearance at the meeting, nor were any policy changes to be announced, McClatchy news service reported.

But that didn't stop a number of religious conservative groups from attacking the meeting as a sign the president has an anti-religious agenda.

"It is one thing for Administration to meet with groups of varying viewpoints, but it is quite another for a senior official to sit down with activists representing some of the most hate-filled, anti-religious groups in the nation," said Council Nedd, chairman of the religious advocacy group In God We Trust.

You see, just because a group doesn't believe in a mythical sky Daddy they get called names like hate-filled. But many of these religious mother fuckers are more hate-filled than any atheist or humanist I've ever met.

But I guess it is OK for the White House to consult "religious leaders" before a speech to Muslims... or for the president to meet the Dalai Lama... or to meet with prominent religious leaders on torture... or to spend over an hour talking and praying with a group of 20-some leaders of America's diverse religious communities...

No, meeting with the deluded is fine... just don't meet (and not even the president, only members of his staff) with the reasonable.

It makes me angry (if not exactly hate-filled).

She's a Jew, No, She's a Christian, Wait, She's Just a Little Girl

The legal wrangling over a three-year-old girl's right to religious freedom caught the attention of Fox News host Bill O'Reilly, who put his own spin on the case Tuesday.

The O'Reilly Factor broke down the case of Joseph Reyes, a father facing criminal charges and jail time for having his daughter baptized and taking her to church despite a judge's December ruling barring him from doing so. The temporary restraining order, filed by Reyes' estranged Jewish wife, bars Reyes from exposing the couple's daughter to any religion other than Judaism.

So this is the gist of this story. This guy, Reyes, converts to Judaism to marry some gal he fell for. They got married and produced a child. Three years later they have divorced and the guy rethinks his conversion. Magically he is a christian again. And he wants his child to be a christian, too. But the mother says no dice, the child is a Jew. She gets a court order. The father defies it and baptises the child.

What a cluster fuck!

Crazy religious bullshit IMHO.

Stories like this one help to clarify why Richard Dawkins calls religious indoctrination of children a form of child abuse...

Un-Constitutional Constitutions

Texas' Bill of Rights Section 4:

" RELIGIOUS TESTS: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

Tennessee's Bill of Rights: Article 9: Section 2.

" No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."

South Carolina's Constitution, Article 4 Section 2:

" Person denying existence of Supreme Being not to hold office. No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."

North Carolina's Constitution, Article 6 Sec. 8:

" Disqualifications of office. The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...."

Maryland's Bill of Rights: Article 36:

" That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefore either in this world or in the world to come."

Article Six of the United States Constitution:

...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

A Good Example of Why Atheists Feel Persecuted by Christians

Religious bigots are trying to use an illegal provision in the North Carolina State Constitution to oppose an Asheville, N.C. elected official who is an Atheist.

Last fall, Cecil Bothwell won a position on the Asheville, N.C. City Council. During the swearing-in ceremony last Monday, however, Mr. Boswell -- an Atheist -- chose to not place his hand on a bible, or swear an oath to a deity. This has outraged opponents, including religious bigots who are trying to use a provision in the North Carolina State Constitution that automatically disqualifies anyone "who shall deny the being of Almighty God."

This provision violates the Constitution of the United States; and it is unlikely that Mr. Bothwell's intolerant opponents could prevail in the legal arena. Nevertheless, this story has spread in media throughout the country, and fueled another round of debate over whether Atheists, Humanists, and other nonbelievers are "really citizens" of the United States!

Global Blasphemy Law?

American Atheists reports: A key U.S. ally in the "war on terror" is one of two nations leading a group of Islamic countries proposing a global ban on "blasphemy."

Associated Press has obtained documents indicating that Pakistan and Algeria are spear heading a campaign to protect religious symbols and beliefs from mockery -- "essentially a ban on blasphemy that would put them on a collision course with free speech laws in the West."

Reporter Frank Jordans of AP observed: "If ratified in countries that enshrine freedom of expression as a fundamental right, such a treaty would require them to limit free speech if it risks seriously offending religious believers." He added, "The process, though, will take years and no showdown is imminent."

The proposed resolution has been presented to the United Nations several times in recent years at the behest of the Organization of the Islamic Conference which represents 56 predominantly Muslim nations. Islamic concerns over blasphemy have been growing. When Salman Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses" was published, for instance, India banned the book as an affront to Islam. Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran then issued his notorious "fatwa" or death sentence; and throughout the world, Islamists organized street demonstrations, riots and even bombings while demanding that governments prohibit the printing or distribution of Rushdie's novel.

In England and several other nations, select Christian, Muslim and even some Jewish leaders condemned the work as an "insult" to religious faith.

Four years ago, the publication of cartoons in the Danish press with an unflattering portrayal of Mohamed led to similar riots and the call for government action to enforce or craft strict anti-blasphemy statutes. And earlier this year, the OIC and its allies introduced a non-binding blasphemy resolution identical to the earlier version. That measure is now slated to be presented at the U.N. General Assembly in December.

Several factors may be fueling the Islamist campaign to rein-in "offensive" and anti-religious expressions. The growth of the Internet and other forms of communications technology has rendered traditional political borders less cohesive. So has the increase in international travel and commerce, along with greater interpersonal contact between diverse "civil society"
groups. Religious movements have benefited from this process as well, though. Islamic fundamentalists often cite the aggressive proselytizing of Christian missionary organizations which many in the Middle East view as a coordinated "attack" on Muslim cultural, religious and political institutions.

Islamists have found some common cause with other religious movements anxious at the spread of values they see as deleterious to faith --everything from consumerism, gender empowerment for women and gays, and secularism in general. Christian evangelicals have denounced American culture for its tendency to "privatize" religion, while at the same time demanding greater access to nations in the Third World -- including Muslim-dominated Southeast Asia and the Middle East -- in order to carry out "the Great Commission" and spread Christianity. Islamic activists have a similar agenda, calling for everything from jihad to the resurrection of an Islamic caliphate into Europe and even the United States. In Britain, for instance, Muslim leaders have expressed outrage at efforts to prevent the building of mosques and religious schools, and are calling for the institution of Sha'ria or religious law.

Pakistan in the Middle?

Pakistan has some of the most severe anti-blasphemy laws in the world. The government must also walk a tightrope between its influential military complex (armed with nuclear weapons, "the Islamic Bomb"), pressure from the United States to cooperate in efforts to suppress the Taliban, and a growing Islamic fundamentalist movement within its own borders. Ironically, a broad coalition of human rights groups, Christians and Muslim legal experts have become increasingly vocal in speaking out against any existing and proposed blasphemy statutes in Pakistan, charging that the measures actually contribute to religious tensions and violence. A report from Asia News last week noted: A popular front is emerging in the country which promises to bring the battle (against blasphemy measures) of laws that provide for life imprisonment or the death penalty for those who profane the Koran, or defame the name of the prophet Muhammed..."

One group calling for prohibition of blasphemy laws is the secular civil society movement Peoples Resistance. It found an unlikely ally in the Pakistan Christian Congress; and in late October, the two organizations held meetings and passed resolutions declaring blasphemy statutes "unjust, unconstitutional and an instrument in hands of extremists to target vulnerable religious minorities."

Feminist and gay liberation groups are also calling for action to abolish the blasphemy statutes; their concerns are being echoed by a number of prominent Pakistani government leaders an politicians who are demanding that the law be repealed. Women's rights activist Hilda Saeed told Asian News, "Pakistan is one of the countries where protection of minorities is respected." Other critics note that the blasphemy statutes were introduced in 1986 under the reign of military dictator Muhammed Zia Al-Haq, and are incompatible with a democratic society.

The blasphemy issue has also become a tool in the hands of religious zealots who cite the need for such a law while carrying out acts of violence against their theological and political opponents..

Ireland -- A Disgrace!

While blasphemy statutes are currently associated with intolerant, authoritarian Muslim governments, support for such measures in the West often takes the form of calls to prohibit "hate speech" and defamatory remarks directed against a specific faith or religion in general.

That rationale worked in Ireland -- for years a Mecca for cutting edge artists, writers and other creative talent --which recently enacted a blasphemy law that was signed by President Mary McAleese in July. It provides stiff fines for publications of utterances that violate the "Defamation Bill." Although it allows for "reasonable" exemptions, critics say that the measure is a slippery slope on the road to banning any criticism or "hurtful" remarks concerning religious beliefs. Procedural glitches have stalled enforcement of the statute, which is now expected to go into effect in January, 2010.

At the United Nations, observers who monitor the effort to enact blasphemy controls say that by continually introducing proposals, the OIC is simply counting on gradually accumulating support that, it hopes,will overwhelm any resistance. The prospect of violence over the next "offensive" cartoon, play, book or remark will also give added voice to blasphemy statute proponents. There is,finally,the on-going confrontation of values -- Enlightenment-era tolerance and civil liberties pitted against calls for religious (Sha'ria) law and "protection" for assorted religious groups. Ironically, as secularism spreads and contributes to the growth of authentic civil society groups, the religious become more anxious that their values are "under stack." In the meantime, it is imperative that defenders of free thought and free expression speak out vocally against any national or international measures like the OIC proposals which, under the guise of "protecting" faith-based groups and ideas, violate human rights, prevent questioning of religion, and provide the faithful a "free pass" from any criticism or doubt.

Death To You All

The Hebrew Commandments and the punishments for those who transgress them, were as follows:

• I Am The Lord Thy God. This Commandment recognized the sovereignty of the Almighty. Rejection of it was seen as a refusal to acknowledge God's authority... Punishment was death by stoning.
• Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods But Me... Punishment was death by stoning.
• Thou Shalt Not Take The Name Of The Lord Thy God In Vain... Punishment was death by stoning.
• Remember The Sabbath Day To Keep It Holy... Punishment was death by stoning.
• Honor Thy Father And Thy Mother... Punishment was death by strangulation.
• Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder... Punishment was death by decapitation.
• Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery... Punishment was death by strangulation.
• Thou Shalt Not Steal... Punishment was death by strangulation.
• Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor Punishment was death by stoning.
• Thou Shalt Not Covet... Punishment was death by strangulation.

So if you wanna hang up these rules in schools or on public property, then you oughta be OK with hanging up the penalty for non-compliance, right? And then let me strangle or stone you to death because you've violated more than one of these... on multiple occasions.

Teenage Pregnancies Higher Among The Religious

A report this week in the journal Reproductive Health describes what researchers call “a strong association” between the teenage birth rate of a particular state and its “level of religiosity.”

I find that interesting. I thought religion discouraged pre-marital sex? Goes to show how much people actually practice what they preach, I guess.

Although several suggestions are examined in this article, I particularly liked the assessment at the end “that religious communities in the US are more successful in discouraging the use of contraception among their teenagers than they are in discouraging sexual intercourse itself”.

Sad, really.

Religion in a Nutshell

Watch the shiny watch.

You're getting very, very stupid.

All is well.

Follow the swinging watch.

Stupid...

More Taxpayers Footing the Bill for Religious Propoganda

High school cheerleaders with short-shorts and ribboned hair took the coliseum's stage and chanted, "Stop, don't touch me there, this is my no, no square," while drawing boxes in the air in front of their va (clap) jay (clap) jays. The crowd of thousands of teenagers erupted with giddy applause at the sight of the girls' bouncy tendrils and playful gesticulation. Preachers led the crowd in prayer, speakers reviewed the Bible and the Ten Commandments, performers danced to Christian gospel music and Jesus' name was repeatedly invoked -- all as a means of convincing teens that there is no option but to save sex for marriage. Now try to guess who paid for this purity pep rally.

Taxpayers! Talk about a "no, no square" -- isn't there supposed to be a chastity belt separating the church and state in this country?

ACLU to the rescue (again, they are heroic defenders of civil liberties): The ACLU said the event featured religious speakers and misinformation about contraception. The ACLU said the Department of Human Services crossed the line of separating church and state with the number of religious speakers and faith-based groups who performed at the summit. The ACLU has filed a complaint with DHS but has yet to get a response.

A Few Things Worth Looking At...

Today's post will offer several links to things I've found interesting and would like to pass along for your entertainment and education:

First up, we have The Thinking Atheist who blogged about some of the utter nonsense in the bible. My favorite is how he summed it up: "It’s perfect. It’s infallible. It’s divine. It’s irrefutable. And there are unicorns in it." Nice job...

Another story I just recently stumbled upon comes from the USA Today. The story talks about how some atheists are choosing to undergo a ceremonial de-baptism. Evidently they use a hair dryer to blow the baptismal waters away. LOL.

ABC News also recently reported about the rise in the number of non-believers. Some of the numbers bandied about include: Some 15 percent of Americans claim no religious affiliation, up from 8.2 percent in 1990, according to Trinity College's American Religious Identification Survey, released in March. Also, the American Humanist Association claims 20,000 financial supporters. That marks a doubling from five years ago, says spokeswoman Karen Frantz.

And finally, it looks like ghosts are now putting a beatdown on the living! But not to worry, they've called in a priest to fix things... that ghost better scurry on back to the great beyond before that priest figures out how to bugger a boogieman!

LMFAO - I Thought Holy Water Could Cure?

Holy water can pass on more than just a priest’s blessing—it can also transmit the swine flu virus, a British bishop says. That’s because churchgoers dip their fingers into one container of liquid, then touch their nose or eyes, thereby giving the virus a free ticket into their body.

For this reason, the bishop is urging priests in Essex, UK, to remove holy water from their churches to prevent cases of the flu.

According to BBC, the Right Reverend John Gladwin said: “The water in stoups [which hold holy water] can easily become a source of infection and a means of rapidly spreading the virus.” Still, he added: “It is not our intention at this stage to cause panic.”

So religious folks are admitted now that holy water can spread diseases? I remember when they used to claim that it could cure them! I guess this is progress... but it'd be better if they just got rid of stupid shit like holy water altogether.

Sex-Abusing Christians and Criminal Clergy

The Rick A. Ross Institute has compiled an impressive (hmmm, not a very good word, but I'll keep it) list of clergy abuse that shows just how "holy" supposed men of god actually are.

Check it out and you'll find priests, vicars, nuns, pastors, preachers and bishops abusing, touching, fondling, snogging, and raping boys and girls all over the world.

Amen.

Clueless Church-Going Bastards

The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified.

My guess why this is so: these folks have been tortured every Sunday and think that others need to be tortured, too. {Note to the humor-impaired: that was a joke... only a joke...}

Oppose HR 397

American citizens: Please email your member of Congress and ask them to refuse to co-sponsor "House Resolution 397" and oppose all efforts to move this resolution forward. This "Christian nation" resolution states that YOU AND YOUR GOVERNMENT:

"recognize the religious foundations of faith on which America was built are critical underpinnings of our Nation's most valuable institutions and form the inseparable foundation for America's representative processes, legal systems, and societal structures."

It tries to form a legal basis for introducing religion to the "Nation's public buildings and educational resources" and tries to solidify keeping "under God" in the pledge.

Your help is needed! Contact your congressional representative now!

http://action.secular.org/t/5367/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27204

Those Crazy Christian Leaders

A SUSPENDED Methodist minister admitted in court on Tuesday (24) that he sent an intimate picture of himself to his ex who is accused of beating him up... Reverend Bates of Rochester Avenue, Bromley told a jury that Ms Corp was "hassling" him after the relationship had ended but during cross examination admitted he had sent her a photograph of his erect penis after they had broken up.

Ahhhh, ya just gotta love a belief system that produces leaders like this guy.