Update on that last post. The Arizona Daily Star published an article on 9-17-09 in regards to several comments made by the Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. In it she is quoted as saying that "God has placed me in this powerful position as Arizona's governor". In addition she detailed to the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church, "As with past challenges, tragedies or problems that I've had to confront, I first and foremost relied on my faith to guide me through, for I believe in the power of prayer," she said. "And I firmly believe that God has placed me in this powerful position of Arizona's governor to help guide our state through the difficulty that we are currently facing." "And that has caused me, of course, to be grateful that we are a country of Christianity," she said.
"I don't think under the circumstances that anybody's in the position of living at this turbulent time, these terrible, critical times of our nation, can possibly get through without asking for help and guidance from Jesus Christ and from God," the governor told the ministers.
"For those of us who have lived it and practiced it, we just know that,"
Mandate from god? Guidance from Jesus Christ? The hijackers of 911 had a mandate from god. The Crusaders of the middle ages had a mandate from god. Even Hitler felt he had a mandate from god. Even our beloved President, George W. Bush, who told the French President Jacques Chirac “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East.... The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled.... This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.” How much blood must be split as a result from a mandate from god?
Most mainstream Christians believe that we are living in the "end times". These end times they are referring to directly relate to an interpretation of The Book of Revelation. In it it details the end of the world as we know it in a great battle between good and evil, the outcome of which will be a 1000 years of peace with Christ as master. In addition all Christians ascend to heaven and to eternal paradise before this war takes place, leaving the rest of humanity to eternal suffering. Truly, why on earth would you want to not bring about your progress to eternal paradise? According to modern biblical scholars, the end times will start with a nuclear war in the middle east and spread through out the world. In addition, this new form of Christianity, the one you see in the "Family" In Washington D.C. and in the Az Center for Policy, believe that the United States is that Kingdom of Christ.
Lets recap, shall we? These people believe that they have a mandate from god to bring about a nuclear war and make the United States a religions dictatorship? Far fetched?
A recent poll showed that Fully 59% of Americans say they believe the events in Revelation are going to come true. This includes Our Governor Brewer, Ex Presidents Bush, and Senators and Congressmen too numerous to post here.
You know, just before my Grandmother died we got a chance to sit and talk about her life. About how she saw her country ripped away from her, first by the Nazis, then by the Communists. She saw her friends and family hung publicly for treason. Family whisked away in the dead of night, taken to concentrations camps never to be see again. She told me after watching the news one night, "you don't know how quickly it happens, one day you just wake up, and everything, it is gone. Be careful".
Friday, September 18, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
I recently had the opportunity to view the Center for Arizona’s Policy you tube video titled “Standing with Arizona Policy”. For those of you that don’t know, The Center for Arizona Policy is a very powerful Christian lobbying group in Arizona that skirts the rules for 501(c)3 organizations with great skill. They were recently responsible for the passing of House Bill 2564 and Senate Bill 1175, effectively tightening abortion laws. This post is a rebuttal to some of the more, provocative statements in this video.
The video can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDe_WBLp78I&feature=player_embedded
What follows are timestamps and quotes from the above video.
0:25 “Awake and Arise”
Keywords used to link to the organization Awake and Arise. This organization follows the teachings of the “Prophet” Patriot Ezra Taft Benson. Also a reference to “Awake Arizona”, A conference recently held in Mesa by the group “Bridge Builders” Cindy Jacobs who ran the conference, bills herself as ''Prophetess to the nations.'', co-founder of Generals International an organization devoted to training in prayer and spiritual warfare. She has written several book the most popular of which is "Possessing the Gates", on Militant intersession. Vocally anti gay and is quoted name checking Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. “We’re not going to give Satan any rest,” she cried. “We’re not going to give city councils any rest. We’re not going to give legislatures any rest.”
0:39 “ How threatened our religious freedoms is in our nation today and in our state”
Exactly whose religious freedoms are we talking about here? The Constitution and Bill of rights of the United States of America very clearly protects everyone’s religious beliefs. I suspect that what they are talking about here is there “right” to impose their dogmatic religion on the rest of us. I challenge them to show me one example of how their religious “rights” have been infringed upon. Can you say the same for the Islamic population of Arizona?
0:47 “”We are trying to protect religious freedom in courts. But also pass legislation that pro actively preserves our rights”
Once again their rights, as all of ours, are already protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This is a classic example of the use of buzz words. They are intentionally using phrases like “protect religious freedom” and “preserves our rights “, in order to gain a reaction. Not only is it misleading, but it is false. It was used here to get a knee jerk reaction from fellow Christians.
1:06 “As long as there are differences of opinion we will always have somebody bringing something that is anti family to the legislature”
Differences of opinion lead to anti family? Let’s clarify; differing from their opinion will always lead to anti family laws being passed. Scare tactics.
1:19 “We virtually look at every bill that’s been introduced in the legislature to see if this is going to impact our families, is this going to impact our religious freedom”
Again they are using the phrase “religious freedom” as if Christianity in this country is somehow threatened. And once again I need to point out that their rights are already protected. So if they are not taking about rights what are they talking about? They have demonstrated that they wish to pass legislation that reinforces their dogma, with no regard to any other belief system. They don’t want religious freedom; they want to change the law in this country so that we have no religious freedom, only their religion.
1:54 “What is seen at times in the legislature is the idea that parents don’t know what’s best for their children”
2:38 “We work to make sure that home schools and private schools wont be regulated”
So, no school standards? No standards for homeschooling? No, sure they want standards, their standards. I suspect that this is a result of the science vs. religion debate. The United States ranks 29th out of the 47th most industrialized nations in the world when it comes to science education by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It measures student literacy in science, math, and reading (focusing this year on science) among 15-year-olds, and is an often-cited reference for policymakers sounding the alarm bells about the state of education in the United States and its implications for the ability of Americans to secure jobs in a global economy.
2:43 “Parents have the right to opt their children out of school activities that are offensive to their religious or moral beliefs”
Let’s make no mistake; they are referring to the Evolution/ Creation debate happening in schools right now. Evolution is science, creationism is religion. I have no problem teaching creationism in a religious studies class; please keep it out of science classrooms. You don’t teach astrology in science do you? Do you teach geology in theology? Accepting the world as the evidence shows us, even if conflicts with their scripture are rational and sane.
3:09 Abortion
I won’t go into the ethics’ of abortion here. Instead let’s look at some legislature that this group just had pass in our state government. The House Bill 2564 and Senate Bill 1175, create a 24-hour waiting period to get an abortion, require physicians to perform the procedure, and require that parents provide notarized consent for their minor children to get abortions. All right, but it also states that pharmacists and other health-care professionals can refuse to provide contraception. What? It is a focus of this group to promote abstinence-only education instead of traditional sex education among teens. No less than three studies in the past five years were done to determine the effectiveness of abstinence in teens. All the studies showed that those taking the virginity pledge engaged in intercourse just as often as those who did not take the pledge . Pledge takers also were found to be less frequent users of condoms and other forms of birth control. Therefore, those youngsters who took the virginity pledge were not only just as likely to have intercourse; they ultimately were more likely to take part in sex in an unsafe manner.
5:00 Marriage-“The goal of our opponents- is to so redefine marriage as to marriage means nothing”
Lets see, The United States leads the world in divorce, with 4.95 per 1,000 people divorcing. There is no evidence that gay marriage has any different divorce rates than straight divorces. The law in this country has already reduced the religious concept of marriage to effectively a civil union, protecting the rights of both parties. It has taken it out of the hands of religion. The argument that allowing gay marriage will reduce their concept of marriage to mean nothing is absurd. It already means nothing according to the statistics. Perhaps they need to look at why the divorce rate is so high in a purely straight population.
6:23 “one man married to one woman is absolutely crucial. We see the effects when you don’t have that in society, we see it in the jails every day”
What the hell is this? I’m not sure what they mean here. Perhaps they are trying to say that homosexuality leads to more crime in our societies? There are no very compelling statistics here, but it is fairly clear that this is an inflammatory comment targeting fear.
7:00 “The truth Project” -“To help us think more critically”
Focus on the Family has launched "The Truth Project," a curriculum designed to reintroduce Christians to a biblical worldview of science, law, and other fields of knowledge. Even other Christian groups have attacked the Truth Project as a mis use of scripture. If anything the, last chapter, on science, shows such a lack of BASIC understanding of science that it is hard not to laugh out loud at some of their assumptions. The largest hole in their approach is that all they say is evolution is wrong. Not so much why creation is right. Not to mention, they never give scientific proof for their reasons.
http://www.planetisaac.com/2009/04/truth-project-science-critique.html
http://hopwoodhopper.blogspot.com/2009/01/wariness-of-truth-project.html
http://mrhackman.blogspot.com/2007/09/truth-project-part-1.html
7:48 “In all these areas and many others we see a great conflict between good and evil and if Christians do not rally to support and encourage those who are trying to bring an influence for good in civil government they leave a vacuum and the influence that is contrary to the standards scripture, and contrary to the purposes of God in the world, and contrary to the advancement of the gospel, that influence is going to become stronger and stronger.”
Ah there it is the truth. To them this is a war between good and evil. Let’s take a look at some of their goals as stated in this last bit.
They wish to conform government to the “standards of the scriptures”. I’m sorry but do we really need a law that puts those of us to death that works on the Sabbath? (Exodus 35:2) Or perhaps destroy everyone in Iraq? (Deuteronomy 7:1-2) or reinstitute slavery? (Ephesians 2:18). The Old Testament clearly gives a mandate for these and other atrocities. They have stated repeatedly that they believe in the bible as the “infallible” word of god.
They want to conform the government to the purposes of God. Who’s god again? And who exactly speaks for God? The Prophetess Cindy Jacobs? The same woman who held a prayer vigil at the stature of the bull on Wall Street to bring her wealth?
Advance the gospel in Government. Again, to what end?
In this video one can find endorsements from Az Representatives Kirk Adams and Steve Yarbrough, State senator Linda Grey, US Congressman Trent Franks, and US Senator Jon Kyl.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights of these United States are very clear about this.
Thomas Jefferson wrote “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
And John Adams wrote and codified into law within the Treaty of Tripoly "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
I am deeply offended and disgusted by this not just from an intellectual viewpoint but from a moral one as well. It seems to me that this was designed as a scare tactic directed toward Christian moderates. Not only is it rife with inaccuracies, it is filled with sensational buzzwords and is intentionally misleading. This is the worse form of propaganda, trying to manipulate through fear.
If you will, remove the religion from the argument for a moment. Pretend that they are purely a secular organization trying to change policy. What are we left with? One could argue, a radical group that wants to dismantle the Constitution and replace it with their form of a fascist state. Why would that be tolerated in our society? It would not, and yet moderate Christians do almost nothing to prevent this insanity.
This isn’t an argument over the existence of god or even of religion; this is one group trying to impose their dogma on the rest of society with no regard for any other belief system or reality. I have to question whether society would be so tolerant if this was a secular group, or I dare say an Islamic one?
The video can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDe_WBLp78I&feature=player_embedded
What follows are timestamps and quotes from the above video.
0:25 “Awake and Arise”
Keywords used to link to the organization Awake and Arise. This organization follows the teachings of the “Prophet” Patriot Ezra Taft Benson. Also a reference to “Awake Arizona”, A conference recently held in Mesa by the group “Bridge Builders” Cindy Jacobs who ran the conference, bills herself as ''Prophetess to the nations.'', co-founder of Generals International an organization devoted to training in prayer and spiritual warfare. She has written several book the most popular of which is "Possessing the Gates", on Militant intersession. Vocally anti gay and is quoted name checking Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail. “We’re not going to give Satan any rest,” she cried. “We’re not going to give city councils any rest. We’re not going to give legislatures any rest.”
0:39 “ How threatened our religious freedoms is in our nation today and in our state”
Exactly whose religious freedoms are we talking about here? The Constitution and Bill of rights of the United States of America very clearly protects everyone’s religious beliefs. I suspect that what they are talking about here is there “right” to impose their dogmatic religion on the rest of us. I challenge them to show me one example of how their religious “rights” have been infringed upon. Can you say the same for the Islamic population of Arizona?
0:47 “”We are trying to protect religious freedom in courts. But also pass legislation that pro actively preserves our rights”
Once again their rights, as all of ours, are already protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This is a classic example of the use of buzz words. They are intentionally using phrases like “protect religious freedom” and “preserves our rights “, in order to gain a reaction. Not only is it misleading, but it is false. It was used here to get a knee jerk reaction from fellow Christians.
1:06 “As long as there are differences of opinion we will always have somebody bringing something that is anti family to the legislature”
Differences of opinion lead to anti family? Let’s clarify; differing from their opinion will always lead to anti family laws being passed. Scare tactics.
1:19 “We virtually look at every bill that’s been introduced in the legislature to see if this is going to impact our families, is this going to impact our religious freedom”
Again they are using the phrase “religious freedom” as if Christianity in this country is somehow threatened. And once again I need to point out that their rights are already protected. So if they are not taking about rights what are they talking about? They have demonstrated that they wish to pass legislation that reinforces their dogma, with no regard to any other belief system. They don’t want religious freedom; they want to change the law in this country so that we have no religious freedom, only their religion.
1:54 “What is seen at times in the legislature is the idea that parents don’t know what’s best for their children”
2:38 “We work to make sure that home schools and private schools wont be regulated”
So, no school standards? No standards for homeschooling? No, sure they want standards, their standards. I suspect that this is a result of the science vs. religion debate. The United States ranks 29th out of the 47th most industrialized nations in the world when it comes to science education by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It measures student literacy in science, math, and reading (focusing this year on science) among 15-year-olds, and is an often-cited reference for policymakers sounding the alarm bells about the state of education in the United States and its implications for the ability of Americans to secure jobs in a global economy.
2:43 “Parents have the right to opt their children out of school activities that are offensive to their religious or moral beliefs”
Let’s make no mistake; they are referring to the Evolution/ Creation debate happening in schools right now. Evolution is science, creationism is religion. I have no problem teaching creationism in a religious studies class; please keep it out of science classrooms. You don’t teach astrology in science do you? Do you teach geology in theology? Accepting the world as the evidence shows us, even if conflicts with their scripture are rational and sane.
3:09 Abortion
I won’t go into the ethics’ of abortion here. Instead let’s look at some legislature that this group just had pass in our state government. The House Bill 2564 and Senate Bill 1175, create a 24-hour waiting period to get an abortion, require physicians to perform the procedure, and require that parents provide notarized consent for their minor children to get abortions. All right, but it also states that pharmacists and other health-care professionals can refuse to provide contraception. What? It is a focus of this group to promote abstinence-only education instead of traditional sex education among teens. No less than three studies in the past five years were done to determine the effectiveness of abstinence in teens. All the studies showed that those taking the virginity pledge engaged in intercourse just as often as those who did not take the pledge . Pledge takers also were found to be less frequent users of condoms and other forms of birth control. Therefore, those youngsters who took the virginity pledge were not only just as likely to have intercourse; they ultimately were more likely to take part in sex in an unsafe manner.
5:00 Marriage-“The goal of our opponents- is to so redefine marriage as to marriage means nothing”
Lets see, The United States leads the world in divorce, with 4.95 per 1,000 people divorcing. There is no evidence that gay marriage has any different divorce rates than straight divorces. The law in this country has already reduced the religious concept of marriage to effectively a civil union, protecting the rights of both parties. It has taken it out of the hands of religion. The argument that allowing gay marriage will reduce their concept of marriage to mean nothing is absurd. It already means nothing according to the statistics. Perhaps they need to look at why the divorce rate is so high in a purely straight population.
6:23 “one man married to one woman is absolutely crucial. We see the effects when you don’t have that in society, we see it in the jails every day”
What the hell is this? I’m not sure what they mean here. Perhaps they are trying to say that homosexuality leads to more crime in our societies? There are no very compelling statistics here, but it is fairly clear that this is an inflammatory comment targeting fear.
7:00 “The truth Project” -“To help us think more critically”
Focus on the Family has launched "The Truth Project," a curriculum designed to reintroduce Christians to a biblical worldview of science, law, and other fields of knowledge. Even other Christian groups have attacked the Truth Project as a mis use of scripture. If anything the, last chapter, on science, shows such a lack of BASIC understanding of science that it is hard not to laugh out loud at some of their assumptions. The largest hole in their approach is that all they say is evolution is wrong. Not so much why creation is right. Not to mention, they never give scientific proof for their reasons.
http://www.planetisaac.com/2009/04/truth-project-science-critique.html
http://hopwoodhopper.blogspot.com/2009/01/wariness-of-truth-project.html
http://mrhackman.blogspot.com/2007/09/truth-project-part-1.html
7:48 “In all these areas and many others we see a great conflict between good and evil and if Christians do not rally to support and encourage those who are trying to bring an influence for good in civil government they leave a vacuum and the influence that is contrary to the standards scripture, and contrary to the purposes of God in the world, and contrary to the advancement of the gospel, that influence is going to become stronger and stronger.”
Ah there it is the truth. To them this is a war between good and evil. Let’s take a look at some of their goals as stated in this last bit.
They wish to conform government to the “standards of the scriptures”. I’m sorry but do we really need a law that puts those of us to death that works on the Sabbath? (Exodus 35:2) Or perhaps destroy everyone in Iraq? (Deuteronomy 7:1-2) or reinstitute slavery? (Ephesians 2:18). The Old Testament clearly gives a mandate for these and other atrocities. They have stated repeatedly that they believe in the bible as the “infallible” word of god.
They want to conform the government to the purposes of God. Who’s god again? And who exactly speaks for God? The Prophetess Cindy Jacobs? The same woman who held a prayer vigil at the stature of the bull on Wall Street to bring her wealth?
Advance the gospel in Government. Again, to what end?
In this video one can find endorsements from Az Representatives Kirk Adams and Steve Yarbrough, State senator Linda Grey, US Congressman Trent Franks, and US Senator Jon Kyl.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights of these United States are very clear about this.
Thomas Jefferson wrote “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
And John Adams wrote and codified into law within the Treaty of Tripoly "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
I am deeply offended and disgusted by this not just from an intellectual viewpoint but from a moral one as well. It seems to me that this was designed as a scare tactic directed toward Christian moderates. Not only is it rife with inaccuracies, it is filled with sensational buzzwords and is intentionally misleading. This is the worse form of propaganda, trying to manipulate through fear.
If you will, remove the religion from the argument for a moment. Pretend that they are purely a secular organization trying to change policy. What are we left with? One could argue, a radical group that wants to dismantle the Constitution and replace it with their form of a fascist state. Why would that be tolerated in our society? It would not, and yet moderate Christians do almost nothing to prevent this insanity.
This isn’t an argument over the existence of god or even of religion; this is one group trying to impose their dogma on the rest of society with no regard for any other belief system or reality. I have to question whether society would be so tolerant if this was a secular group, or I dare say an Islamic one?
Monday, July 13, 2009
Call to Arms
Every civilization comes to an end. The great empires of the past, the Romans, the Greeks, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Han dynasty, Egypt, are all now effectively extinct. Even in recent times we have seen the collapse of great civilizations, the USSR comes to mind. We have this prejudice that our society is somehow immune from this, that we could never come to an end.
If you were to poll people in the United States what they thought was the largest threat to our civilization was I suspect you would receive answers like, global warming, the economy, war, capitalism, socialism. All are valid answers, but what if I told you that right now there is a majority of people that believe that they have a mandate from god to bring about the end times and the destruction of the world, all derived from a book written in the Iron Age? Crazy?
‘Oh, you’re talking about the religious right, well they don’t really have any real power do they?’
No more power than 9 people had on September 11, 2001.
By most recent statistics Christianity comprises a full 76% of the population of the United States. The fastest growing population among Christians in the past 7 years is what is referred to evangelical or fundamental Christians. It is the Mandate of this group to claim the United States as the “arm” or “sword” of god. They have infiltrated the military to such a degree now that they are handing out New Testament bibles in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and bullying non Christian cadets at the Air Force Academy in Colorado. This of course is expressly forbidden in the military, but leaders, appointed by the ultra religious ex President Bush, turn a blind eye. In addition the “Faith Biased Initiative” started by Bush is still funding these groups even though we now have a regime change in the white house. This is the power of the religious right. In addition moderate Christians are extraordinarily reluctant denounce this movement.
Sound familiar? It should. Islam was accused of the same thing after 9-11.
So what’s the harm? Recent polls show 44% of Americans are confident that Jesus will return to Earth sometime in the next 50 years. What possible motivation do they or politicians that represent them have to improve our world? In fact, they like the Jews and the Muslims, want to bring about the end times, in order to facilitate their ascension to their version of heaven.
Why is it inconceivable to us that these groups won’t “grease the wheels” so to speak to further their agenda? In fact there is a great deal of evidence to show that they are in fact doing so, and at the highest level of power. In 2002, 2003, and 2004 President Bush regularly consulted with the Evangelical Christian right on Middle East policy. Think about the absurdity of that for a moment.
Religion is toxic to the world and to morality. Do we credit religion for the advances in morality in the past 500 years on subjects such as women’s rights, slavery or basic human rights? No, in fact religion has consistently drug its feet on these subjects. A recent example of this would be the Vatican edict to ban condom use in Aids ridden Africa, even though the cost of life and suffering will be enormous. No, I would argue that it was the rise of critical thought and science that improved our morality. It showed us that we are all human beings. That the outdated concept of race is false, and no people are better than others. That we are one world of trillions in an unbelievably vast universe. If anything, religion eventually bowed from pressure from the people to change their morality.
There are still over 8,000 active nuclear weapons in the world today. Each one with enough destructive force to destroy a population center the size of Los Angeles. And there are an equal number of chemical, biological or radiological weapons in existence. We have the capacity, right now, to destroy every human being on the planet, several times over.
I am not foolish enough not to recognize that every generation feels as compelled to act of what they perceive a threat to their existence. In fact the early Christian church thought jesus was returning in their life times as well. The difference is that this is the first time in human history that the people that want to bring about the end of the world have not only the power but the means to do it. You do not need to have your world view challenged at all in order to graduate from any university.
I am angry that we live in a society in which the truth cannot be spoken without offending 90% of the population. The truth is, there is no good reason to believe that the Bible, the Koran, or any other book that was dictated by a "god" in the Iron Age has any relevance upon us today. In fact the evidence shows just the opposite. We do not derive our morality from religion. The end result of belief in these systems is not only corrosive to us as a society but if gone unchecked will destroy humanity.
Make no mistake, our civilization can and will come to an end. We live in a time of unparalleled reason and unparalleled ignorance. We now have a choice. Fight back against this, as Richard Dawkins outlined in his “call to arms”. Or return to a time of superstition, ruled by fear, and quite possibly the end of our civilization.
In the next several months I shall be posting video, tools, and create a new website dedicated to helping those who wish to fight back against this in a non violent and legal way. Stay tuned……….
1 *All data within this blog comes from the 2001- 2008 study, the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), by Barry A. Kosmin, Egon Mayer, and Ariela Keysar at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. ARIS 2001-2008 makes data available for the continental U.S. and DC. If you need additional data (such as state by state information on religions) please refer to the study located at http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm
2 *All numbers are estimates from the Natural Resources Defense Council, published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, unless other references are given. If differences between active and total stockpile are known, they are given as two figures separated by a forward slash. If no specifics are known, only one figure is given. Stockpile number may not contain all intact warheads if a substantial amount of warheads are scheduled for but have not yet gone through dismantlement; not all "active" warheads are deployed at any given time. When a range of weapons is given (e.g., 0–10), it generally indicates that the estimate is being made on the amount of fissile material that has likely been produced, and the amount of fissile material needed per warhead depends on estimates of a country's proficiency at nuclear weapon design.
If you were to poll people in the United States what they thought was the largest threat to our civilization was I suspect you would receive answers like, global warming, the economy, war, capitalism, socialism. All are valid answers, but what if I told you that right now there is a majority of people that believe that they have a mandate from god to bring about the end times and the destruction of the world, all derived from a book written in the Iron Age? Crazy?
‘Oh, you’re talking about the religious right, well they don’t really have any real power do they?’
No more power than 9 people had on September 11, 2001.
By most recent statistics Christianity comprises a full 76% of the population of the United States. The fastest growing population among Christians in the past 7 years is what is referred to evangelical or fundamental Christians. It is the Mandate of this group to claim the United States as the “arm” or “sword” of god. They have infiltrated the military to such a degree now that they are handing out New Testament bibles in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and bullying non Christian cadets at the Air Force Academy in Colorado. This of course is expressly forbidden in the military, but leaders, appointed by the ultra religious ex President Bush, turn a blind eye. In addition the “Faith Biased Initiative” started by Bush is still funding these groups even though we now have a regime change in the white house. This is the power of the religious right. In addition moderate Christians are extraordinarily reluctant denounce this movement.
Sound familiar? It should. Islam was accused of the same thing after 9-11.
So what’s the harm? Recent polls show 44% of Americans are confident that Jesus will return to Earth sometime in the next 50 years. What possible motivation do they or politicians that represent them have to improve our world? In fact, they like the Jews and the Muslims, want to bring about the end times, in order to facilitate their ascension to their version of heaven.
Why is it inconceivable to us that these groups won’t “grease the wheels” so to speak to further their agenda? In fact there is a great deal of evidence to show that they are in fact doing so, and at the highest level of power. In 2002, 2003, and 2004 President Bush regularly consulted with the Evangelical Christian right on Middle East policy. Think about the absurdity of that for a moment.
Religion is toxic to the world and to morality. Do we credit religion for the advances in morality in the past 500 years on subjects such as women’s rights, slavery or basic human rights? No, in fact religion has consistently drug its feet on these subjects. A recent example of this would be the Vatican edict to ban condom use in Aids ridden Africa, even though the cost of life and suffering will be enormous. No, I would argue that it was the rise of critical thought and science that improved our morality. It showed us that we are all human beings. That the outdated concept of race is false, and no people are better than others. That we are one world of trillions in an unbelievably vast universe. If anything, religion eventually bowed from pressure from the people to change their morality.
There are still over 8,000 active nuclear weapons in the world today. Each one with enough destructive force to destroy a population center the size of Los Angeles. And there are an equal number of chemical, biological or radiological weapons in existence. We have the capacity, right now, to destroy every human being on the planet, several times over.
I am not foolish enough not to recognize that every generation feels as compelled to act of what they perceive a threat to their existence. In fact the early Christian church thought jesus was returning in their life times as well. The difference is that this is the first time in human history that the people that want to bring about the end of the world have not only the power but the means to do it. You do not need to have your world view challenged at all in order to graduate from any university.
I am angry that we live in a society in which the truth cannot be spoken without offending 90% of the population. The truth is, there is no good reason to believe that the Bible, the Koran, or any other book that was dictated by a "god" in the Iron Age has any relevance upon us today. In fact the evidence shows just the opposite. We do not derive our morality from religion. The end result of belief in these systems is not only corrosive to us as a society but if gone unchecked will destroy humanity.
Make no mistake, our civilization can and will come to an end. We live in a time of unparalleled reason and unparalleled ignorance. We now have a choice. Fight back against this, as Richard Dawkins outlined in his “call to arms”. Or return to a time of superstition, ruled by fear, and quite possibly the end of our civilization.
In the next several months I shall be posting video, tools, and create a new website dedicated to helping those who wish to fight back against this in a non violent and legal way. Stay tuned……….
1 *All data within this blog comes from the 2001- 2008 study, the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), by Barry A. Kosmin, Egon Mayer, and Ariela Keysar at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. ARIS 2001-2008 makes data available for the continental U.S. and DC. If you need additional data (such as state by state information on religions) please refer to the study located at http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm
2 *All numbers are estimates from the Natural Resources Defense Council, published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, unless other references are given. If differences between active and total stockpile are known, they are given as two figures separated by a forward slash. If no specifics are known, only one figure is given. Stockpile number may not contain all intact warheads if a substantial amount of warheads are scheduled for but have not yet gone through dismantlement; not all "active" warheads are deployed at any given time. When a range of weapons is given (e.g., 0–10), it generally indicates that the estimate is being made on the amount of fissile material that has likely been produced, and the amount of fissile material needed per warhead depends on estimates of a country's proficiency at nuclear weapon design.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Mother
I see delicate rain whispering her love,
Recall the beautiful moment
and read eternity
in the wind.
Let him cry
for his dream
is in summers blood.
Recall the beautiful moment
and read eternity
in the wind.
Let him cry
for his dream
is in summers blood.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Does truth lie in eye of the beholder?
Part 2 of a 3 part series exploring the nature of truth.
So what is truth?
The word truth has a variety of meanings, from honesty, good faith, and sincerity in general, to agreement with fact or reality in particular.
In fact according to WIKI there are no less than 14 different theories on truth.
For the sake of this blog I will use the most common, the Correspondence theory. Correspondence theory states that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. So we can say that there is a “fact” of matters or events. The ball is red. The sky is blue. Night is dark. We can all agree on the fact of these things. But what about questions like, will Obama fix the economy? That question is amazingly more complex then it seems on the surface. Republicans say no, democrats say yes. But why the confusion? 200 years from now we could look back and say, yes or no to that question with some authority, just as we can now say who won the civil war. So there is a fact of things, a truth to them, separate of opinion. With our bias, our opinions, and our faulty senses, how do we come to this truth?
Science and critical thinking my dear friends…
So what is this “Critical thinking”? Critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. It is a way to process the data that we receive from our senses in order to come to a truth.
What about science? Why the hub bub about that? It is defined as systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. In other words it is a method of determining facts or truth by utilizing tools such as critical thinking and the scientific method. At its most basic form it is:
1. Use your experience: Consider the problem and try to make sense of it. Look for previous explanations. If this is a new problem to you, then move to step 2.
2. Form a conjecture: When nothing else is yet known, try to state an explanation, to someone else, or to your notebook.
3. Deduce a prediction from that explanation: If you assume 2 is true, what consequences follow?
4. Test: Look for the opposite of each consequence in order to disprove 2. It is a logical error to seek 3 directly as proof of 2.
Let’s say we have a ball, we are trying to determine the color of this ball. Let us also suppose that in this case the ball is red.
First of we observe the ball, we believe it is the color blue. We look at other balls, their labels, their characteristics. We form the hypothesis, “I think the ball is blue because my perception tells me it is blue”. We deduce “all persons must see this ball as blue”. And we create a test to determine this. So how to do that? Well, we would want this test to be independent of or senses and opinions, we would want it repeatable, and we would want our peers to look at it for mistakes. So we create a test. We take ten people, and ask them to write down what color they think the ball is. We also take another ball, a white one and ask ten more people to write down what color they think it is. This is the control group. It is there to make sure that the data we get is not skewed by something we may have missed. In addition we will be publishing our results in the magazine “Ball weekly” the premiere ball color magazine in the world for the public to review.
So what were our results? Well, our study showed that 10 out of the ten persons said that our ball was red not blue. What about our control? They all said that their ball was white, so their perception was not skewed in any way. In addition we published and our “ball enthusiast” public all also agreed that our ball is red not blue.
Our hypothesis was wrong. We run the study again, this time with the assumption that the ball is red, and our results verify our hypothesis. At this point we can call out hypothesis a theory. A theory is the highest level any answer can attain in science. Do not mistake it with the common use of the word. A theory states within 99.99999999999999999% accuracy that the data fits the theory, consistently.
In contrast faith and psudo science say that the ball is blue, because god, the bible, some divine being, some ancient wisdom, tell us it is so. This is despite the evidence, despite our study. As much as we would distort the word blue, rationalize the point, the ball would still remain factually red, not blue.
So how accurate is this wacky thing you call science? Well it depends on just how complicated a system is and how much we know about it. For example, we can predict the movement of the planets and eclipses to extraordinary accuracy. We can measure the distance to the moon to within millimeters, which is the width of a pencil lead. We can predict an eclipse to within nano seconds. In fact almost all science theory is accurate to this level. Even the Theory of evolution accurately predicted that we would find the fossils that we have, and found them and at what time in the past they would have lived. Without this accuracy in science your computer, car, phone, lights, air conditioning, stove, microwave, radio, cd player, dvd’s would not exist. If you are older than 33 you would also most likely be dead as the life expectancy has risen from 33 to 79 in just over 200 years! This is due to Science.
So thus is the power of truth.
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth,
which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in
self-delusion and ignorance which does harm."
[Marcus Aurelius]
So what is truth?
The word truth has a variety of meanings, from honesty, good faith, and sincerity in general, to agreement with fact or reality in particular.
In fact according to WIKI there are no less than 14 different theories on truth.
For the sake of this blog I will use the most common, the Correspondence theory. Correspondence theory states that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. So we can say that there is a “fact” of matters or events. The ball is red. The sky is blue. Night is dark. We can all agree on the fact of these things. But what about questions like, will Obama fix the economy? That question is amazingly more complex then it seems on the surface. Republicans say no, democrats say yes. But why the confusion? 200 years from now we could look back and say, yes or no to that question with some authority, just as we can now say who won the civil war. So there is a fact of things, a truth to them, separate of opinion. With our bias, our opinions, and our faulty senses, how do we come to this truth?
Science and critical thinking my dear friends…
So what is this “Critical thinking”? Critical thinking is purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. It is a way to process the data that we receive from our senses in order to come to a truth.
What about science? Why the hub bub about that? It is defined as systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. In other words it is a method of determining facts or truth by utilizing tools such as critical thinking and the scientific method. At its most basic form it is:
1. Use your experience: Consider the problem and try to make sense of it. Look for previous explanations. If this is a new problem to you, then move to step 2.
2. Form a conjecture: When nothing else is yet known, try to state an explanation, to someone else, or to your notebook.
3. Deduce a prediction from that explanation: If you assume 2 is true, what consequences follow?
4. Test: Look for the opposite of each consequence in order to disprove 2. It is a logical error to seek 3 directly as proof of 2.
Let’s say we have a ball, we are trying to determine the color of this ball. Let us also suppose that in this case the ball is red.
First of we observe the ball, we believe it is the color blue. We look at other balls, their labels, their characteristics. We form the hypothesis, “I think the ball is blue because my perception tells me it is blue”. We deduce “all persons must see this ball as blue”. And we create a test to determine this. So how to do that? Well, we would want this test to be independent of or senses and opinions, we would want it repeatable, and we would want our peers to look at it for mistakes. So we create a test. We take ten people, and ask them to write down what color they think the ball is. We also take another ball, a white one and ask ten more people to write down what color they think it is. This is the control group. It is there to make sure that the data we get is not skewed by something we may have missed. In addition we will be publishing our results in the magazine “Ball weekly” the premiere ball color magazine in the world for the public to review.
So what were our results? Well, our study showed that 10 out of the ten persons said that our ball was red not blue. What about our control? They all said that their ball was white, so their perception was not skewed in any way. In addition we published and our “ball enthusiast” public all also agreed that our ball is red not blue.
Our hypothesis was wrong. We run the study again, this time with the assumption that the ball is red, and our results verify our hypothesis. At this point we can call out hypothesis a theory. A theory is the highest level any answer can attain in science. Do not mistake it with the common use of the word. A theory states within 99.99999999999999999% accuracy that the data fits the theory, consistently.
In contrast faith and psudo science say that the ball is blue, because god, the bible, some divine being, some ancient wisdom, tell us it is so. This is despite the evidence, despite our study. As much as we would distort the word blue, rationalize the point, the ball would still remain factually red, not blue.
So how accurate is this wacky thing you call science? Well it depends on just how complicated a system is and how much we know about it. For example, we can predict the movement of the planets and eclipses to extraordinary accuracy. We can measure the distance to the moon to within millimeters, which is the width of a pencil lead. We can predict an eclipse to within nano seconds. In fact almost all science theory is accurate to this level. Even the Theory of evolution accurately predicted that we would find the fossils that we have, and found them and at what time in the past they would have lived. Without this accuracy in science your computer, car, phone, lights, air conditioning, stove, microwave, radio, cd player, dvd’s would not exist. If you are older than 33 you would also most likely be dead as the life expectancy has risen from 33 to 79 in just over 200 years! This is due to Science.
So thus is the power of truth.
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth,
which never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in
self-delusion and ignorance which does harm."
[Marcus Aurelius]
Monday, June 15, 2009
Is there in truth no beauty?
Disclaimer:
Today I want to start a new 3 part blog post on the nature of truth. Mind you, I am not referring to the subjective truth that we all feel from time to time, but rather the objective truth, the fact, the reality. This post shall also reveal things that one might find offensive and or objectionable, but after all, that is the nature of truth.
Is there in truth no beauty?
Ever since I was a small child I have always been asking questions. I have always been interested in the reasons behind things, the truth of the matter if you will. This of course led to some rather uncomfortable confrontations in catholic school. Inevitably this evolved to the usual curiosity that most children have, although I suspect most children didn’t try to disassemble a television. In college I had the good fortune to attend several classes on Western History. Please forgive me, I do not remember the professors name, but if you can imagine a class being taught by an atheist jesus you get the picture. One of the most valuable thing he or anyone for that matter has ever taught me was that there was a truth to history, to people, that was quite different to the popular view. For example the events attributed to Paul Revere and his famous ride, was a fiction, created by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and detailed the account of three different riders. I became fascinated with this.
As a society we tend to glorify individuals, to raise them on a pedestal or deify them. In a very real sense we remove their accomplishments from the realm of the possible. An analogy would be saying that the pyramids were built by Aliens. This implies that humans are incapable of building them on their own. To illustrate this point I will need three volunteers……. Ok, you in the first row The Dahli Lama, and you next to him, Gandhi, and what about you in the back with the blue scarf, Mother Theresa.
When we think of all three of these people we get this mental image of great peace keepers or incredible humanitarians. I’m not here to dispute that claim, but did you know that one of these people was a vocal racist against blacks? That one of these people accepted millions of dollars from the CIA to fund guerrilla warfare in his former country? Or that one of these created a cult of suffering and denied basic health care to those that she professed to help all the while traveling and collecting millions of dollars to open more “hospitals”. Don’t believe me? Look it up, the record is clear.
The Dalai Lama admitted that he received 1.7 million dollars a year from the U.S. Government to fund guerrilla operations against the Chinese. The Dalai Lama himself was on the CIA’s payroll from the late 1950s until 1974, reportedly receiving $180,000 a year. In addition, the Tibet that he wants to go back to was a horribly unequal social situation where the peasant class comprising 95% of the population lived in abject poverty so that the remaining 5%, the priest class could live in opulent wealth. The Dalai Lama is widely considered one of the greatest humanitarians alive today.
Gandhi not only spoke out against blacks while he was in South Africa he wrote about it quite extensively in the local newspaper “ The Indian Opinion “. Gandhi’s desire for Indians to be segregated from blacks was so strong that he went to Johannesburg in late August of 1904 to protest the placing of blacks in the Indian section of the city. Gandhi was elevated to the status of Mahatma, a title reserved for the greatest of thinkers, analogous to the western “saint” and one Gandhi himself denied.
Mother Theresa and the Missionaries of Charity took in millions from whatever source they could including the family of Papa Doc, The “butcher” of Haiti. There are many accounts from prior nuns, who left the order in disgust, after seeing how the money was being squandered instead of going to the poor as promised. In addition she believed that suffering was important for the soul and denied those she sought to help basic health care. Mother Theresa has been venerated and is well on her way to Sainthood in the Catholic Church.
So what is the point of this? Why should we remember these people as they were and not as society perceives them? Well it is precisely because they have done amazing things that I want this. The Dalai Lama is the premiere humanitarian alive today. He has done untold good in the world. Gandhi started the non violent resistance movement that freed India from colonial rule and ultimately lead to the civil rights movement in the United States. And Mother Theresa went on a public awareness campaign that raised awareness for the horrible conditions and desperate poverty worldwide. She opened our eyes.
When we raise people up to the level of Sainthood, when we deify them, and create an idealized version of who they are, we set them out of reach. They become unattainable. But when we accept them as human beings, on the same level as us, with the same flaws, and fears as us, all of a sudden their great accomplishments enter the realm of the possible.
We all have the capacity for compassion that the Dalai Lama has or the strength of Gandhi or the compassion the Mother Theresa had. We all have these abilities in ourselves. We are capable of these things and so much more if we only learn to listen to ourselves, and the truth.
Today I want to start a new 3 part blog post on the nature of truth. Mind you, I am not referring to the subjective truth that we all feel from time to time, but rather the objective truth, the fact, the reality. This post shall also reveal things that one might find offensive and or objectionable, but after all, that is the nature of truth.
Is there in truth no beauty?
Ever since I was a small child I have always been asking questions. I have always been interested in the reasons behind things, the truth of the matter if you will. This of course led to some rather uncomfortable confrontations in catholic school. Inevitably this evolved to the usual curiosity that most children have, although I suspect most children didn’t try to disassemble a television. In college I had the good fortune to attend several classes on Western History. Please forgive me, I do not remember the professors name, but if you can imagine a class being taught by an atheist jesus you get the picture. One of the most valuable thing he or anyone for that matter has ever taught me was that there was a truth to history, to people, that was quite different to the popular view. For example the events attributed to Paul Revere and his famous ride, was a fiction, created by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and detailed the account of three different riders. I became fascinated with this.
As a society we tend to glorify individuals, to raise them on a pedestal or deify them. In a very real sense we remove their accomplishments from the realm of the possible. An analogy would be saying that the pyramids were built by Aliens. This implies that humans are incapable of building them on their own. To illustrate this point I will need three volunteers……. Ok, you in the first row The Dahli Lama, and you next to him, Gandhi, and what about you in the back with the blue scarf, Mother Theresa.
When we think of all three of these people we get this mental image of great peace keepers or incredible humanitarians. I’m not here to dispute that claim, but did you know that one of these people was a vocal racist against blacks? That one of these people accepted millions of dollars from the CIA to fund guerrilla warfare in his former country? Or that one of these created a cult of suffering and denied basic health care to those that she professed to help all the while traveling and collecting millions of dollars to open more “hospitals”. Don’t believe me? Look it up, the record is clear.
The Dalai Lama admitted that he received 1.7 million dollars a year from the U.S. Government to fund guerrilla operations against the Chinese. The Dalai Lama himself was on the CIA’s payroll from the late 1950s until 1974, reportedly receiving $180,000 a year. In addition, the Tibet that he wants to go back to was a horribly unequal social situation where the peasant class comprising 95% of the population lived in abject poverty so that the remaining 5%, the priest class could live in opulent wealth. The Dalai Lama is widely considered one of the greatest humanitarians alive today.
Gandhi not only spoke out against blacks while he was in South Africa he wrote about it quite extensively in the local newspaper “ The Indian Opinion “. Gandhi’s desire for Indians to be segregated from blacks was so strong that he went to Johannesburg in late August of 1904 to protest the placing of blacks in the Indian section of the city. Gandhi was elevated to the status of Mahatma, a title reserved for the greatest of thinkers, analogous to the western “saint” and one Gandhi himself denied.
Mother Theresa and the Missionaries of Charity took in millions from whatever source they could including the family of Papa Doc, The “butcher” of Haiti. There are many accounts from prior nuns, who left the order in disgust, after seeing how the money was being squandered instead of going to the poor as promised. In addition she believed that suffering was important for the soul and denied those she sought to help basic health care. Mother Theresa has been venerated and is well on her way to Sainthood in the Catholic Church.
So what is the point of this? Why should we remember these people as they were and not as society perceives them? Well it is precisely because they have done amazing things that I want this. The Dalai Lama is the premiere humanitarian alive today. He has done untold good in the world. Gandhi started the non violent resistance movement that freed India from colonial rule and ultimately lead to the civil rights movement in the United States. And Mother Theresa went on a public awareness campaign that raised awareness for the horrible conditions and desperate poverty worldwide. She opened our eyes.
When we raise people up to the level of Sainthood, when we deify them, and create an idealized version of who they are, we set them out of reach. They become unattainable. But when we accept them as human beings, on the same level as us, with the same flaws, and fears as us, all of a sudden their great accomplishments enter the realm of the possible.
We all have the capacity for compassion that the Dalai Lama has or the strength of Gandhi or the compassion the Mother Theresa had. We all have these abilities in ourselves. We are capable of these things and so much more if we only learn to listen to ourselves, and the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
