You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Religion’ category.
This is old teleological hat with regards to anyone who has participated in debates with the religious. I like the video though because, even though it rehashes the old themes, it does so in a way that separates and insulates one against some of the white hot emotion that can and does go into debating the religious view of reality. It’s a clean, thoughtful presentation through and through.
On the whole, a very nice thought experiment put forward by DarkMatter2525.
I appreciate the hard work has done over at Jerico Brisance in putting together this lovely infographic, just in time for Easter Sunday. :) Get the PDF here for clarity and future reference purposes.
Like all of our imaginary friends gods, Terence deserves a little respect as his way – the way of the honey-badger – can be the only true way to heaven. Cool Hard Logic examines the toxicity of religion and the spurious arguments that are used to defend adult’s imaginary friends.
I’m glad to report that NonStampCollector is at it again. This collaborative effort with 43Alley is a wonderful return to his old form. Enjoy all the benefits that “An instant, fruit-based moral education” has to offer.
Let’s keep the magical thinking out of schools.
Let’s be upfront. The demographic situation in Alberta in the days gone past dictated that we have two school boards. Keeping the religious happy was much higher on up on the agenda in the 20th century. I get that.
It is, however, the 21st century. Religious cotton-brained ideas and the accompanying adherence to magical thinking should have no place in a secular society.
As a teacher I find it distasteful that fellow members of my profession are actively teaching ‘magic-as-reality’ to naive children who look to teachers as a secure attachment point and reliable source of information. It boggles the mind.
Let’s scrap the ‘separate’ school system and worry about giving a meaningful learning experience to all children – not just the ones that are lucky enough to go to public school.
When you believe in magic you can just stow your moral and ethical compass in your back pocket and whistle while you do God’s work.
“Estimates suggest that anywhere between 60 and 80 percent of migrant women and girls are raped on their journey as they travel across the southern United States border. But many of the organizations that provide medical care to these migrants are refusing to provide emergency contraception or make pregnancy-related referrals to girls who have been raped. What’s more, the religious organizations that operate these groups are opposing a move by the Obama administration to address epidemic rape of young unaccompanied migrants by requiring contraceptive care.”
I don’t know about you, but I’m whistling up a storm. It takes a great deal of raw tune-age to mask the sound of melting moral/ethical compasses.
“[…]the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) that would require federally funded organizations that house unaccompanied migrant children to provide victims of sexual abuse with “unimpeded access to emergency medical treatment, crisis intervention services, emergency contraception, and sexually transmitted infections prophylaxis, in accordance with professionally accepted standards of care, where appropriate under medical or mental health professional standards.”
The rule includes a clause that would allow faith-based organizations to offer external pregnancy-related referrals for unaccompanied children. Grantees that house unaccompanied children could deny services “on religious or moral grounds,” needing only to coordinate with federal staff members who would provide the services. But a letter submitted last week even objected to a referral requirement that would “impose a duty on the conscientious objector to refer for the very item or procedure to which it has a religious or moral objection.” What’s more, the letter co-signers want the ORR to free up organizations “from any requirement to provide, facilitate the provision of, provide information about, or refer or arrange for items or procedures to which they have a religious or moral objection.”
My belief in foolishness trumps your rights as a human being to receive medical care. Or more bluntly – You, Girl-Child, get to keep the rapist’s baby – because Jesus.
There is not a thicker blight on the moral order of the universe than wooly-headed religious beliefs like this. I’m short on the indignation today, I just wrote a post about how awesome Jim Prentice and Tory rule has been for Alberta, so all I have left is to say that this level of callous fuckwittery is just plain ole’ evil.
Oh, and of course, evil has support in the GOP.
“At the time, Republican lawmakers like Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) unleashed a round of attacks against the Obama administration over its “anti-Catholic bias.” Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) stated that the USCCB was a victim of discrimination “solely because it fundamentally respects the innate value and preciousness of an unborn child and refuses to be complicit in procuring his or her violent death by abortion.” Smith has otherwise supported anti-abortion legislation that makes exceptions in cases of rape and incest for minors. Still, ORR continues to contract with the USCCB and other faith-based organizations to provide services for unaccompanied alien children.”
Somethings just don’t change. :/
The chance of being raped is quite high for women migrating to the US. This reality that women face when they attempt to cross the border. This is also the reality that the aforementioned Faith Based Groups stridently ignore…
[h/t: to recent commenter Muffy for bringing this article to my attention.]
I’m always impressed with La Belle Province and her ability to serve up controversy. Recently a judge in Quebec decided that a hijab was considered not to be suitable attire for her courtroom and dismissed a case when the litigant refused to comply with her request. The judge’s words courtesy of the CBC:
“Hats and sunglasses for example, are not allowed. And I don’t see why scarves on the head would be either,” Marengo says in the recording.
“The same rules need to be applied to everyone. I will therefore not hear you if you are wearing a scarf on your head, just as I would not allow a person to appear before me wearing a hat or sunglasses on his or her head, or any other garment not suitable for a court proceeding.”
The stage is set and the result:
“When El-Alloul first appeared before Marengo, the judge asked her why she had a scarf on her head. El-Alloul replied that it was because she is a Muslim. The judge then said she would take a 30-minute recess.
When Marengo returned, she told El-Alloul she had a choice: remove her headscarf immediately or apply for a postponement in order to consult a lawyer. El-Alloul replied that she couldn’t afford a lawyer and that she didn’t want to postpone the case. Marengo then adjourned the case indefinitely.”
Boom. Tinder meet match. Religious freedom versus the institutional values of a secular court.
There are a multitude of ways to look at what transpired in the courtroom but here are two that I think represent both sides of the argument.
A. In a secular court of law, the secular values and rules of a society must be followed. If a judge rules that what you’re wearing to be inappropriate for the proceedings it behooves you to follow the same standards that everyone else must follow.
B. Canada is a multicultural society and we respect and treasure the cultural practices that every Canadian brings to the table and, if secular protocol can be reinterpreted to allow for the diversity of cultural expression within secular institutions we should do so.
Before we go into further discussion we should note the reaction from El-Alloul, it was one of shock and dismay:
“[…] But what happened in court made me feel afraid. I felt that I’m not Canadian anymore.”
“El-Alloul said she’s speaking out because she doesn’t want what happened to her to happen to any other Muslim woman. When she insisted I should remove my hijab, really I felt like she was talking with me as … not a human being. I don’t want this thing to happen to any other lady. This is not the work of a judge. She doesn’t deserve to be a judge.”
El-Alloul is rightly quite upset at the outcome of her hearing (or lack thereof). There should be a more amenable solution available to the parties involved – a transfer to a different judge that has a more liberal interpretation of ‘suitably dressed’ might have saved a lot of ink and electrons as this story blossomed across Canadian news networks.
This seemingly simple case of what “suitably dressed” means and how it is enforced speaks to how intersectional an issue multiculturalism is. Institutional power in Canada remains largely white and male and thus reflects the normative values of what is considered ‘normal’ culture here in Canada. From this orthodoxy we get the notions such as:
1. Why should our Canadian institutions cater to every whim of the minorities?
2. If it is good enough for everyone else, what is the problem here?
3. Why aren’t secular Canadian values being learned by new Canadians?
Under the assumption that we are a multicultural society, clearly, point 1 is out to lunch. The very point of having a tolerant open society is that we appreciate and try to accommodate the everyone and their preferences within the state structure of Canada.
Point 2 is problematic because the words “everyone else” usually uses the dominant culture as a touchstone thus, by play of words, avoids the obvious racism associated with similar statements.
Point 3 has the most merit as new Canadians do adopt Canadian values and standards, but the process of acculturation takes a great deal of time, often generations before the values of the dominant culture are ingrained. It is unrealistic however to expect that somehow Canadians of all types have a switch that can be flipped instantaneously that would guarantee cultural assimilation.
The Hijab should be allowed in Canadian courtrooms as it does not interfere with workings of the court or the dispensing of justice.
However, as an open and tolerant secular society we should also have the ability to rightly name and not adopt cultural practices that would be corrosive to our society. For instance, honour killings and female genital mutilation, have no place in Canadian or any other civilized society and I can assert this claim with a good deal of confidence because we need only to discuss the negative impacts these practices have on those societies who still practice these modalities (cultural relativism be damned).
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…