You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘How Religion Poisons Everything’ tag.
Here in the West and in the East we have our religious nutters. What is not being covered as much in the media here is the moderate response to the “film” the Innocence of Muslims. Avaaz.org has a great article which I’ve taken bits out of and posted for your reading pleasure.
Seven things you may have missed in the ‘Rage’:
Like everyone else, many Muslims find the 13 minute Islamophobic video “Innocence of Muslims” trashy and offensive. Protests have spread quickly, tapping into understandable and lasting grievances about neo-colonialist US and western foreign policy in the Middle East, as well as religious sensitivities about depictions of the Prophet Muhammad. But the news coverage often obscures some important points:
1. Early estimates put participation in anti-film protests at between 0.001 and 0.007% of the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims – a tiny fraction of those who marched for democracy in the Arab spring.
2. The vast majority of protesters have been peaceful. The breaches of foreign embassies were almost all organised or fuelled by elements of the Salafist movement, a radical Islamist group that is most concerned with undermining more popular moderate Islamist groups.
3. Top Libyan and US officials are divided over whether the killing of the US ambassador to Libya was likely pre-planned to coincide with 9/11, and therefore not connected to the film.
4. Apart from attacks by radical militant groups in Libya and Afghanistan, a survey of news reports on 20 September suggested that actual protesters had killed a total of zero people. The deaths cited by media were largely protesters killed by police.
5. Pretty much every major leader, Muslim and western, has condemned the film, and pretty much every leader, Muslim and western, has condemned any violence that might be committed in response.
6. The pope visited Lebanon at the height of the tension, and Hezbollah leaders attended his sermon, refrained from protesting the film until he left, and called for religious tolerance. Yes, this happened.
7. After the attack in Benghazi, ordinary people turned out on the streets in Benghazi and Tripoli with signs, many of them in English, apologising and saying the violence did not represent them or their religion.
Add to that the number of really big news stories that were buried last week to make room for front page, angry Muslim “Clash” coverage. In Russia tens of thousands of protesters marched through Moscow to oppose Russian President Vladimir Putin. Hundreds of thousands of Portuguese and Spaniards turned out for anti-austerity protests; and more than a million Catalans marched for independence.
I love it when people try to use their putrid magic books to say that they have a strong basis for their morality and ethical outlook. Of course its mostly these same people who don’t actually read the bible to see what it actually says. For your pleasure and edification a handy infographic on Christian Marriage.
So, when religious people ask me, as an atheist, on where I get my morality from I can happily say, not from the same place *you* do. Mill, Kant are good places to start for rational moral thinking, finish with Lakoff and Singer. :)
Mystro introduced me to the youtuber WildWoodClair1. She has a nice channel with many videos mocking christian inanity in the multitudinous forms it comes in. Our selection today is a particularly concise take down of bad christian religious ideas stated with risibly solemn rectitude by clueless christians. Enjoy. :)
Islam, religion of Peace burns down American Embassy illustrating dedication to rational non-violent ways of resolving disputes.
This just in the from insano-delusional land (credit CBC.ca):
“Many Muslims find it offensive to depict the Prophet Muhammad in any fashion, much less in an insulting way.
This week’s attacks on U.S. diplomatic outposts in Egypt and Libya, the latter of which claimed the lives of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three others on Tuesday, erupted after a 14-minute trailer of an obscure movie by a California real-estate developer. The film was posted on YouTube in English and later in Egyptian Arabic.
Ultraconservative Islamists were suspected of being behind the attack in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi. Advocating a strict interpretation of Islam, they have bulldozed Sufi shrines and mosques that house tombs in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, and other cities, including ancient sites dating back to 5,000 years ago.”
So, like the danish cartoons, the publishing of this film somehow gives people the right to flip out the buttered insane fuck-crumpets and burn shit up and kill people? This is part of the trailer that has incensed the reality challenged.
Wow. This film ranks below Poolboy:Drowning out the Fury on my list of awful movies.
So, full marks for beating out PoolBoy, but not really a honour one should be striving toward. Let’s recap so far, some dude makes a crumby, ass-pustule of a flick and because it makes fun of your godhead of choice *you* get to kill people.
“The movie trailer depicts Muhammad as a fraud, a womanizer and a madman in an overtly ridiculing way, showing him having sex and calling for massacres. An amateur cast performs a wooden dialogue of insults disguised as revelations about Muhammad, whose obedient followers are presented as a cadre of goons. The film was being promoted by an extreme anti-Muslim Egyptian Christian campaigner in the United States, and was financed with the help of more than 100 Jewish donors according to Sam Bacile, who wrote and directed it.”
Yep. I can totally see how shedding innocent blood is called for in cases like this. Chris Stevens and three others were destined to give their lives to fanatics hepped up on righteous god-juice over a D-list movie.
Let me reiterate, religion is harmful to people and society if it is not kept in check by a strong secular state the kind of irrational bullshite that our muslim friends demonstrated in Libya happens. Believing in magic and mythology for the nth time, has no place in the modern world. We commit plenty of atrocities without the help of those who lose their shit when you depict their ooga-booga of choice.
Indeed, religion does poison everything it touches and creates the nightmare world which we striving to leave behind us.
It’s funny, for all the take-down, all the arguing all the debate that has been featured here at DWR, sometimes a picture just nails what is so wrong with a concept. In this case the idea is christian religion.
The picture is so sad. And yet people want to believe that this happened and are *happy* about it. The work of a loving vengeful god.
Hey I need some help eroding the church/state separation. Lets ask the experts!
I’m not really sure what is so shit-hot about the attitudes and conventions of the Dark Ages, but Harper and his government have decided to fecklessly dive into the land of pants-on-head stupid and establish a official government bureau of “Religious Freedom”. Let’s be clear, not something useful like an office sponsoring freedom FROM religion, so sorry Rishma of Pakistan, you still get be sentenced to death for allegedly burning pages from a magic book. Because, obviously we need MORE religion in the world because rational thought is too fucking hard to deal with.
“The federal government’s long-awaited Office of Religious Freedom will be unveiled soon, officials say, after months of delays caused by difficulty in finding the right person to head the office.
The new body, which will be housed within the Department of Foreign Affairs, was expected to be up and running earlier this year.
But a senior government official told CBC News that Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird has had a hard time finding someone to fill the role of ambassador to head up the office. Two people who were approached ultimately turned the post down for logistical and personal reasons.?
Reasons why? Because being head of the Canadian christian god brigade overseas is not appealing. I’m really flabbergasted at my government right now. I’m imaging that in some meeting some wonk pops this ass-blister of a suggestion and throws it out there –
“Hey, you know that separation of church and state thing, its dumb, lets set up an office and get the government officially involved in delusional religious shit”. Ohh the meetings goes quiet. “But where are we going to get the money?” says Economic Wonk, our resident member of brain trust of turdistan says, “oh, well we closed a bunch of science and research down there is plenty of money saved from that…”.
And then there was cabinet/Harper approval. Yes, lets close down scientific research on one hand and fund the promotion of stale religious brain-flatulence from the bronze age. Brilliant! How can we lose? It is astonishing that people voted for people that actually endorse this sort of thinking.
“Some supporters of the idea have grown frustrated with the long wait. The $5-million office was first announced during the May 2011 election campaign as a centrepiece of the government’s foreign policy.”
A vesitgal bone thrown at the dumb-as-dirt religious value voters that worked. Apparently jebus said lower corporate tax rates so we can screw the rest of society over. To my idjit right of centre commentators, did you notice that you only get lip-service paid to your nuttily-regressive ‘social conservative” goals all the while the economic conservatives who hold the real power happily continue to gut the bastions of the social democratic state? You think getting screwed over would become tiresome after the nth time, apparently you thought in 2011, *this* time it would be different.
Bhatti argues the new ambassador must be objective.
“The person shouldn’t be one-sided,” he said. “He doesn’t focus on the one religion, or one persecution. He will treat every religion equally and give his recommendation to the foreign office and government regarding truth and reality.”
I don’t even know what this means. But I think I would be a good candidate for the job. I all religions the same, with contempt, would this make me a good candidate for the job? Probably not since the ability to think clearly is not selected for when trying to get a job within a religion.
“As CBC NEWS reported last year, internal Foreign Affairs documents showed nearly all of the panellists who participated in a closed-door consultation with Foreign Affairs last fall in Ottawa were drawn from Western religions, primarily Christianity. Few Muslims were in attendance and there were no Muslim panellists.
Arvind Sharma, a Canadian scholar of religion, has been carefully monitoring the government’s plans, and says the idea presents a great opportunity for Canada on the world stage.
But the McGill University professor warns that’s only if Canada avoids promoting proselytization.”
Yep, Canadian Christians for Christ, sponsored by the secular government of Canada? *sigh* Canada is a secular democracy and really needs to axe this crumby idea.
Giving government support to mythology is stupid and needs to stop before even more people get that idea that religion is an still acceptable choice in the 21st century.
Christian ‘morals’ plus the abortion issue and dudes, you know where we are headed….
I’m not sure if I like the “reader” function that wordpress offers as a part of its blogging platform. Searching the Abortion tag seems to consistently raise my blood pressure because of beastly shite that I find out there. Today’s turd of a post is entitled ‘Tough Choices” and after reading it my tough choice was either to cry or vomit. Luckily I chose option “3” and will employ the red pen of justice and take this privileged anti-choice dude apart.
“A young girl, around 12 or 13, is walking down the street at dark, when suddenly a man takes her and violently rapes her. Devastated, she falls into a state of depression. She is ready to put it all in the past when she realizes something–she’s late on her period. Terrified, she obtains a pregnancy test which confirms her fears. She is pregnant with the child of a rapist’s.
Now, I know some people would say that she needs to have the right to an abortion. Well–and yes, I know this is probably an unpopular opinion–I disagree.”
[Well it is good to establish that you have a firm hatred of women and their bodily autonomy from the outset.] Yes, rape is traumatic.[The faux-empathy begins here]
I can’t even begin to imagine having to go through it [It’s shitty, and you don’t want first hand experience].
However, if a victim of rape realizes she is pregnant, she probably feels scared, alone, and vulnerable. Some women would want to turn to abortion. But abortion is a cold lie [Where the frack does this come from? Abortion is not a lie, it is a medical procedure Is an appendectomy a cold lie too?]. It may seem appealing, like you can magically “undo” all that happened by a simple procedure, but in reality, it is the killing of a child[anti-choice distortion, the first of many – It is not a child, we get a child after the little event called “Birth”. Acorns are not oak trees]. Should a child’s life [*facepalm* – repeating misinformation does not make it more true] be taken just because of the crime the father committed?
Abortion in cases of rape takes a vulnerable, traumatized girl and further disturbs her by killing her child [Like carrying the results of rape for 9 months isn’t traumatizing?]. The results of abortion in cases of rape is one dead child [one terminated pregnancy, FIFY] and one extremely wounded mother [keep in mind the author is talking about a 11 or 12 year child, the term “Mother” is grossly misused].
Which seems more traumatic to you: being raped, becoming pregnant, having the child killed, and having to live with that the rest of your life; or, being raped, becoming pregnant, delivering the child, putting the child up for adoption, and living knowing that your child is alive as well? [you missed the option of suffering though and possibly dying in pregnancy] (though some women choose to keep their children rather than giving them up for adoption, a most admirable move)
Some pro-lifers want an exception for rape[yes, they have something resembling empathy and respect for women]. However, I don’t think there should be one. It may seem heartless at first[because it is], but once you look at the real reasons[fetus worshipping] why abortion shouldn’t be allowed in cases of rape[women should be second class citizens/incubators nothing more], I think you will better understand[We do understand, the hate for women and their autonomy screams from every line of this post].
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…