This is a continuation of the premise only slightly touched upon in my Amercian Churches blog. The main reason that separation between Church and State is imperative is that government should never intrude into people's beliefs, as long as those beliefs don't break a law.
Thus, it's acceptable for organized religions to hold beliefs about creationism; prophets; miracles; supreme beings or just one supreme being. They can also believe that there is a better place and a worse place for us all to go, when we die. But it's only perception, not actual fact. Mythology gets thrown into that mix, which doesn't make it any more factual. It appears to me that dodges were perpetrated at that Nicene Council way back when!
I'm apalled some people's faith is so deeply reverent that they wish their beliefs were made into law, or an edict, to compel government funded institutions to teach a certain set of beliefs over any others, to validate their own religious views. At the same time, I'm glad some people's faith is so deeply reverent that they don't need that kind of validation. This last group is in the minority, I fear.
Well, I'm the "doubting Thomas," and I trust science & Darwinism over Biblical creationism, as there have been great scientific discoveries through the ages that seemed not to come from God, but appear to have been methodically discovered, through trial and error, a very human trait. I think mankind deserves much more praise than it collectively gets from believers of organized religions, dare I say it, even God, if God even exists, who though they seem disgusted by it, are equally human, and part of mankind, with all its flaws, virtues, and habits.
This is my America. May it regain its footholds on common sense, integrity, truth, and justice FOR ALL. Amen.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
American Churches
I was brought up to be a good Christian. But when I became an adult, I saw too often how many self-professed Christians are really the back-sliding reprobates so often denigrated in the teachings of Paul.
I've tried several times to join a Christian church, but I just can't get on board with organized religion. Too controlling, too intolerant, and too political. For a group that promotes brotherly love, forgiveness, and charity, there's far too much hate, bigotry, and hypocrisy to spout what they obviously don't practice in their own personal lives. For those of you who ARE good Christians and reading this, I apologize now, for what I've just observed.
Too many churches have only one race in their congregations. Too many have become so enraptured by the conservative movement in the past 2 decades, that they are now lobbying amongst Republican Congressional members to get the Bible taught in public schools. Here in Texas, some of our own state's legislators have already done so.
They don't like anything remotely liberal. But if they'd just think about what they're saying, the United States of America's Constitution is just about the most liberal document ever produced by enlightened men after the Revolution.
They have several arguments they use to address people who believe in separation of Church and State: the motto, "in God we trust" is on all our monetary currency; there's nothing wrong with the Bible's teachings in a public school; the 10 commandments are in many courthouses throughout the country.
Those are nice sentiments. I have nothing wrong with putting the 10 commandments in a public school, because it is a code of conduct, a set of laws. The rest of the Bible needs to remain in Sunday school classrooms, not public ones. That's why there are schools sponsored by organized religious groups.
The divide comes when the Bible should be taught in science classrooms for it's creationism as an alternative BALANCE to Darwinism and science in general. Also, they seem to be using only the Protestant Bible. There are many Bibles, so if it is to be taught, then it follows that ALL BIBLES, and ALL RELIGIONS AND THEIR FACTIONS/GROUPS should be taught as well.
My argument is this: there is already a place for all the religions and bibles to be taught. It's called THEOLOGY, and is taught in many universities and colleges throughout the world, in HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENTS, as well as SEMINARIES throughout the country and the world.
There is no place in public schools for the Bible, any Bible, or other religious tome, in the public classrooms, even as an elective. It belongs in the Churches, their private schools, in homes, and in seminaries. It SHOULD NEVER BE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REGULATED BY GOVERNMENT. NEVER. This movement by conservatives is a form of passive anarchy to turn our democracy into a theocracy. These people who advocate this are the most UN-AMERICAN Americans since Nixon's witch-hunt for communists. For shame.
I'm sick to death already of one religious group starting a jihad against us in the West. But I'm even more disgusted with so-called American Christians shoving their dogma down MY throat in an attempt to legislate moral virtues which they themselves don't, nor can't, exhibit in their daily lives.
I've tried several times to join a Christian church, but I just can't get on board with organized religion. Too controlling, too intolerant, and too political. For a group that promotes brotherly love, forgiveness, and charity, there's far too much hate, bigotry, and hypocrisy to spout what they obviously don't practice in their own personal lives. For those of you who ARE good Christians and reading this, I apologize now, for what I've just observed.
Too many churches have only one race in their congregations. Too many have become so enraptured by the conservative movement in the past 2 decades, that they are now lobbying amongst Republican Congressional members to get the Bible taught in public schools. Here in Texas, some of our own state's legislators have already done so.
They don't like anything remotely liberal. But if they'd just think about what they're saying, the United States of America's Constitution is just about the most liberal document ever produced by enlightened men after the Revolution.
They have several arguments they use to address people who believe in separation of Church and State: the motto, "in God we trust" is on all our monetary currency; there's nothing wrong with the Bible's teachings in a public school; the 10 commandments are in many courthouses throughout the country.
Those are nice sentiments. I have nothing wrong with putting the 10 commandments in a public school, because it is a code of conduct, a set of laws. The rest of the Bible needs to remain in Sunday school classrooms, not public ones. That's why there are schools sponsored by organized religious groups.
The divide comes when the Bible should be taught in science classrooms for it's creationism as an alternative BALANCE to Darwinism and science in general. Also, they seem to be using only the Protestant Bible. There are many Bibles, so if it is to be taught, then it follows that ALL BIBLES, and ALL RELIGIONS AND THEIR FACTIONS/GROUPS should be taught as well.
My argument is this: there is already a place for all the religions and bibles to be taught. It's called THEOLOGY, and is taught in many universities and colleges throughout the world, in HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENTS, as well as SEMINARIES throughout the country and the world.
There is no place in public schools for the Bible, any Bible, or other religious tome, in the public classrooms, even as an elective. It belongs in the Churches, their private schools, in homes, and in seminaries. It SHOULD NEVER BE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REGULATED BY GOVERNMENT. NEVER. This movement by conservatives is a form of passive anarchy to turn our democracy into a theocracy. These people who advocate this are the most UN-AMERICAN Americans since Nixon's witch-hunt for communists. For shame.
I'm sick to death already of one religious group starting a jihad against us in the West. But I'm even more disgusted with so-called American Christians shoving their dogma down MY throat in an attempt to legislate moral virtues which they themselves don't, nor can't, exhibit in their daily lives.
Monday, May 11, 2009
What Makes A Bitch, Bitch?
This question occurred to me after I wrote the previous blog today. I'm sure many people are curious as to what makes a bitch, bitch. I will attempt to discover the reasons.
- They crave power, because deep down they're inferior; that feeling could be anything they know they don't have.
- When they have power, they bash others over the head with it needlessly, to make themselves feel even better.
- Occasionally they make big faux pas. They will address the issue by reducing the offense until they can finally accept it as the right thing.
- When the reduction has been effected, then they will twist it and try to make YOU the galling idiot.
- As long as they are NOT the target, bullying mercilessly is fun to them.
Other People's Friends Are Not Always My Friends
Just made a new friend recently about 2 1/2 weeks ago, through a good mutual friend. Yeah, it was on Facebook. Funny thing about other people's friends. They should remain just that.
Sometimes a small circle gets along very well, until an incident occurs amongst them. I was just a virtual online bystander, wasn't involved, except for the flood of messages from the 2 who were there, one of whom was the receiver of the incident in question, & who both asked me for some advice, which I gave them this past weekend.
I am a new friend. But the incident in question, which will not be discussed here, caused me to delete the brand new friend, yesterday. Then I thought better of it this morning, after I'd learned she'd apologized, and re-added her. Had it not been for the snotty announcement on her "what's on your mind" thought for the day, I would have just commented that I was glad things were getting sorted. Especially since she re-added me. After reading her b*tchy & self-serving commentary, my good thoughts changed, and added my own superior thoughts. Yeah, she deserved what I said. I deleted her for good.
I then told the mutual friend what I'd done, and said- "she can bloody F***K OFF AND DIE," adding, "I'm sorry." I really am.
I didn't know her as well as our mutual friend, so I'm not that upset. But I know our mutual friend probably is disappointed that I don't approve of her, his "best m8", as he thinks of her, not only for the incident that occurred, but for the sheer childishness of her statements after I re-added her.
Yes, I shouldn't have deleted her after the myriad messaging from the mutual friends yesterday. I should have left it alone. But I was so shocked at the opposite of what our mutual friend had said of her, that I still can't reconcile the two extremes. Particularly when I know what happened. The day after the incident, she was happy and crowing about what she did on her home page. It was a true criminal act, that is usually paid for with jail time.
I've learned my lesson. I will stick to the friends whom I select, that I know from the test of time are my true friends.
Sometimes a small circle gets along very well, until an incident occurs amongst them. I was just a virtual online bystander, wasn't involved, except for the flood of messages from the 2 who were there, one of whom was the receiver of the incident in question, & who both asked me for some advice, which I gave them this past weekend.
I am a new friend. But the incident in question, which will not be discussed here, caused me to delete the brand new friend, yesterday. Then I thought better of it this morning, after I'd learned she'd apologized, and re-added her. Had it not been for the snotty announcement on her "what's on your mind" thought for the day, I would have just commented that I was glad things were getting sorted. Especially since she re-added me. After reading her b*tchy & self-serving commentary, my good thoughts changed, and added my own superior thoughts. Yeah, she deserved what I said. I deleted her for good.
I then told the mutual friend what I'd done, and said- "she can bloody F***K OFF AND DIE," adding, "I'm sorry." I really am.
I didn't know her as well as our mutual friend, so I'm not that upset. But I know our mutual friend probably is disappointed that I don't approve of her, his "best m8", as he thinks of her, not only for the incident that occurred, but for the sheer childishness of her statements after I re-added her.
Yes, I shouldn't have deleted her after the myriad messaging from the mutual friends yesterday. I should have left it alone. But I was so shocked at the opposite of what our mutual friend had said of her, that I still can't reconcile the two extremes. Particularly when I know what happened. The day after the incident, she was happy and crowing about what she did on her home page. It was a true criminal act, that is usually paid for with jail time.
I've learned my lesson. I will stick to the friends whom I select, that I know from the test of time are my true friends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
