Chatter

There, in the distance, the light fades. Where has the chatter gone? Imagine standing beside a busy set of train tracks. Now, imagine the 5:03 coming down the line. Do you stay put? Do you step aside? Do you run for the hills? Do you turn and face it as the thunder grows and the vibrations crescendo? The thrum of all that energy moving through you.... Is it too much? Are you aware as the train passes or have you curled up into a little ball and now play hide and psychic seek with the world? A peek-a-boo game where you don't exist because the power of the train was too much for your little person inside your skull. The moment passes and the world in silence settles around you once again. You think you survived, but truth is that wetness running down your chin and leg tells all. You are a babbling idiot who peed himself. Most "people" can't survive the train even though it is actually safe to stand next to the tracks. All too often this is what happens to those who stand next to us when we discuss matters of substance. The great flying spaghetti monster people flee while they shit themselves. Alas, our train seems to have gone down a side track. Silence reigns king. To all out there who matter.... nobody? nobody. No-Body! I was pretty sure there were some, but they must have all become sheep bleating to their invisible sky daddy. I am ringing the bell of freedom, it's a school bell, but class must be out. Sigh. Time to put coal in the cold firebox and start this monster. Time to shake the ground and the trees (and freight over the fisher of men). Long over due, the 12:38 got lost. Conductor, the fires of knowledge are being stoked. Time to get this train moving. Taber-chuckle here we come.

Taber-Chuckle : 2012-Jan-23

Bad traffic forced me to take a back route to work today and that means passing by the original home of the Taber-Chuckle. I didn't have time to snap a photo but have recreated the sign with one of those handy meme generators. Enjoy.

Either way, you've run aground.

Taber-Chuckle: 2011-Dec-02

The joy of the lord is your strength.

(As I write this a few weeks later, I honestly cannot remember what was the point I had at the time. Fortunately, you need only see the phrase in context to find something egregious about it. Historical context illuminated by James R. Davis at FocusOnG**.com)

To its credit, this little ditty is inspirational. Replace the theological aspect with scientific inquiry and it remains as inspiring. However, I came to lambast this saying, not praise it. In context, it is a story about looking at what you have, be grateful and celebrate life. In all, still not a bad suggestion. It is the general message ofFrank Capra's It's a Wonderful Life. People love that movie for that very reason. It does gloss over the point that it's okay to not be satisfied with your situation. After all, that is the catalyst for most change in people's lives: you are happy with what you have or not and you're willing to do something about it. Much like George Bailey in the movie, the Israelites in the parable are whiney about their situation. In both instances, the sky daddy intervenes to tell these individuals that all is okay and be glad with what you have, meager and insignificant though it may be to the grand scheme of things. The scheme of some individuals will always be insignificant and once you can embrace this, you'll find yourself a much happier person.

As I mentioned, it's a decent observation that is easily adapted to a non-theological stance that retains its inspirational aspect. Nevertheles,  the message of "be happy with what you have" is oppressive. "You're still alive and you have me, your sky daddy. Stay where you are. All is well! I repeat, all is well!"

If you're happy or content, you are less likely to better yourself, to seek something new and exciting for the sake of that very discovery and its inherent journey. That right there is the story of humankind. That is inspirational. Interstellar-space forbid, you move on, leaving the comfort of the sky daddy. I say that because eventually, every journey will take an individual to a point where sky daddy cannot go. Some people will stop at that point and be content. Good on them for finding that balance in their life. Some people will press on and discovery ever greater wonders. Good on them for not stopping human progress.

 

See you there.

Nonsense everlasting, plain and simple

From Penn Jillette's book, God, No!: Signs You May Already Be an Atheist and Other Magical Tales:

There is no god and that's the simple truth. If every trace of any single religion died out and nothing were passed on, it would never be created exactly that way again. There might be some other nonsense in its place, but not that exact nonsense. If all of science were wiped out, it would still be true and someone would find a way to figure it all out again.

(via DaringFireball)

Men who beg

When did men become so insignificant that they let some impotent mindless activity fill their days? In the past, men did not join causes to try and pimp some crafted social moment or cause to try and guilt people into giving of their time, effort, and money. Men just told people about the problem, rolled up their sleeves, and got to work. Now, these pseudo men join causes. They go about attempting to get others to do their work for them. Movember is a prime example of this. These fag ass pimps seek to get others to do their work when in fact they should be earning money and donating it to prostate cancer. Too bad they wimp out and beg from a servile weakness. This is really what is going on. Begging. When did the beggar obtain such a vaunted position in society? Beggars used to be spat upon. Except now, too often, I see them felt sorry for by all those weak sniveling spineless wimps. Oh yes you can have one of my hard earned dollars because you are cold and hungry. Because you are too lazy to go get a job. Earn your living you damned parasite. But no! This is asking too much of the bum beggar. We must value him because we feel for him. What if we were in his position? Wouldn't we want someone to give to us because we were down on our luck? Those pseudo men do. Those who were men faces but who are not men do. They have been tricked into believing that to give to those who do not wish to do for themselves is a good thing, this they think is valuable. In truth, it is not.

The weakness displayed by these pimps of poverty these parasites who feed on and unltimately destroy the true definition of what it means to be a man. They who participate in begging are the vermin that need destruction. Women have arranged it for them. Wear your pink lady dress you simps who pimp feeling instead of doing for one's self. You all disgust me with your valueless stance. I'll bet you even pee sitting down because your member has been put in the vault of your wife's purse. It is time to man up. Obtain your identity and start doing instead of begging. If you want to solve problems stop joining this cause or that cause. Put your shoulder to the grind stone and work for a buck. Take that buck and give it to x, y, z charity, cause, or effort. Then you will once again find your manhood that has been taken from you by those so called women who love you and society that has destroyed you.

I leave those feel good moments, ads, and social pop-pimping to the weak beggars who can't do for themselves, and thus seek to get others to do for them. Oh what I wouldn't give to do to them and those women who wear mustaches.

Taber-Chuckle II: Nov 23, 2011

Psalm 119:105 — Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path.

At least, that's what the sign wanted to say, if there were enough room.

 

Now that I have a new route to and from work, I miss my old Taberchuckle source. That had some beauties. In it's place, I have chosen a big Lutheran church by the freeway. While they typically do not make up inspirational phrases as the old Taber did, they do pick actual passes, so far as I've seen. What I am finding nice about this approach is that it lets me take a sentence and expound  upon it. The wording might be slightly concatenated to fit the sign but I look it up and see how it plays in context and what was left out. Here is the inaugural Taberchuckle II.

 

What always irks me the most is the call to subservience. You would think that with Christianity growing out of the enslaved peoples of Rome, they might want to shake of those vestiges of bondage. Equally as annoying is the constant harping on the same note that "my was is the only way and you are shit without it". What company wouldn't want to see their product to half of the world with simple messaging like that? It is this aspect that annoys me with this phrase.

 

Let's start with the "to my feet" component. Why is this here? It could certainly be a vestige of archaic phrasing that is lost to us now but I know how to walk without looking at my feet so lighting my path would sufficient, thank you very much. Next, why is the traveller so fixated on his feet? Why isn't she watching where she's going? More to the point, why is the scenery being ignored? Because it is wicked and evil? Says who? Maybe it's because our traveller might see another path, one that is better lit and with better scenery and fraught with less peril?

What about the traveller who does not need the light, who has better night vision because of genetics or because he already knows the road? Maybe I am luminous on my own and do not need your light. Why travel at night in the first place?

There is a reason that the iconography for knowledge is a lamp. The whether it's Diogenes looking for the wise man or jebus and its brand of truthiness, they both offer knowledge. One is good to you now, the other when you're dead. Which benefits you more? That is the individual's true choice.

 

Maybe I don't like the brand of oil this message provides. I'll still use oil in my lamp, just not  yours. Plus, I'm going to look down that road to see what's coming rather than focus on where I am at just that moment. Looking down the road, I can see some of the wonders the future might bring and spot opportunities to take a different path and to plan for that change, instead of marching along in the dark, staring at my own two feet, eyes averted to the world.

 

Keep that head bowed, traveller.

When cometh the monster

While I was out doing my morning constitutional, I was turning over in my head the idea of contacting tech support for the company that provides a storage service at work to see if they have any improvements that would greatly benefit me. In particular, this service is very slow on my machine because the file system method they use is a nightmare when using the normal standard to access it and they do not have a Macintosh client for it. Anyway, I was thinking of describing it as "slower than the arrival of Christmas in a godless country".

Uh, oh. Now I take off on a tangent.

Maybe I should say, "slower than Christmas in the Roman Empire". No, better yet: "slower than a colonial times Yule festival". Yeah. As much as the fucking Republicans love to harp on and on about the Founding Fathers and Christmas, why not bring back the Yule festival, a wonderful drunken debauch that would last for days. At least, they will have tradition to allow their private vices.

No, they'd never go along with that. Just like their vision of American Christianity, they like to cherry pick this and that, never the whole concept, much less in context. Their vision is nothing more than a Frankenstein monster. If only we could jump to the end where The Monster destroys its creator.

I smiled and finished my walk in record time.

Blank Stare

There are moments when terror truly rises to confront us. Being in a small dingy on the open ocean during a hurricane. While performing a space walk, your ship explodes; thus, leaving one all alone-drifting in space, and of course being talked to by Jebus lovers. These noxious bastards have that vacant kind of stare that dope fiends have. The empty, blank stare confronting one when these cohorts of doom come by causes all truth seekers to shiver. What is worse is the fact that they believe they have the right, no, the commandment from Jebus himself to talk to others. However, what they don't realize is the fact that they aren't talking to others. They are talking at others. Thus, no real conversation can occur. They are safe from enlightenment and truth. All they have to do is keep...talking...and drown out the voices that may cause dissonance, a murmur in the pattern. So, they yammer on to one another about the same damn thing every time they get together. You have all heard them repeat the same fucking mindless drone phrases over and over. I mean, here I am trying to enjoy my pancakes and I haven't even been awake for a full 2hrs and these assholes come by. Makes me want to fling gas on them and watch them burn. If I did that, then maybe... just maybe the noise they make would finally have some truth in it.

Just doing my part (from 2010-07-26)

I finally broke down and decided to actually cook a real dinner last night. Pork chops, sauerkraut and homemade macaroni and cheese. None of these things I had so I was off to the store.

Going in and out of the store, I had the thrill of shooing away a  panhandler making his pitch for something for some kid or kids somewhere. Not sure what it really was because he was still rattling of his programmed dialog with an exceptionally mush-mouthed dialect as I walked away. I loaded the car and dropped of the cart.

Then came the second panhandler.

It was a woman who, thankfully, kept her pitch short: single mom, unemployed, can I wash the windows on your car?

"No, thank you." "So there's nothing you can spare?"

I understand that part. I don't need my windows cleaned but perhaps there is still hope for some charity.

"No. I'm sorry." I walk on.

"God bless you, anyway."

Anyway?

What fucking gall. Perhaps, lady, your suffering is God's wondrous plan and his hand moved to stay mine from offering charity. That can only lead me to conclude that he wants you to suffer and, if he's feeling charitable himself, die in misery. Who am I to stop that?

I do give to charities but not to any that help humans. Humans can help and better themselves. They just have to want to do something about it. I guess it's easier to wait for a handout than actually make something of your predicament. Sheep, set for life.

 

A thought about stem cells

There is no rational reason to prohibit stem cell research. It is good for mankind and expanding human knowledge, which never is bad.

That's why "people of faith" are against it.

I was motivated by the recent federal circuit judge ruling that blocked federal funding for stem cell research. It has now been reversed but I am sure that an appeal is already working its way into the system. Ignorant savages people of faith may be, they are benefiting from the science and knowledge gained from medical research. Only the nutjobs who are completely against all man-made medical treatment are doing it right...and dying out as a result. Good on them. Keep it up.

 

I am happy to announce that I have an answer to all of this. It came to me on the toilet one morning.

If you are opposed to stem cell research, you may not use non-natural medical techniques when you ail. Deal with your plight. It's what The Farfalla would want.

You also may not utilize fertility treatments. Obviously, The Farfalla does not want your filth to breed. Since you will not propagate, you might as well off yourself now since that is the sole purpose of your empty, non-contributing life. I recommend hanging with a hemp rope. They are very durable.

 

You may use fertility treatments, however, under one of two conditions:

Option One: the female who is stupid enough to have this mindset can have only one ovum at a time harvested. Most source material for stem cells come from fertility services where many ova are harvested and fertilized a time. Just take one at a time and implant it. If it does not work, you pay full pop again and again in both cash and pain. It's what The Farfalla would want.

Option Two: You may not use fertility treatment for yourself but you may have implanted all of the remaining ova from a single donor. You essentially adopt the remaining ova from one donor and will have one implanted every year until the cache is depleted. You may not have state or government subsistence to support your brood. Either you and your family can support them or not. You may not put them up for adoption and with luck, many will starve to death. That will be your fault.

Actually, there is a third option: keep your filthy sewer shut and your superstitious crap to your self. You don't like stem cell research, don't benefit from it. Those who do, will.

Despite two thousand years of oppression, humanity has clawed its way out of the filth despite Xianity's constant badgering and we are better for it. Now we, or some of us, stand upright instead of living in a state of constant genuflex. Humanity will evolve and become better. For some inexplicable reason, we will drag these anachronistic fools with us. Maybe it's the Xian thing to do.

We need some Conquistadors

A couple of weekends ago, I saw a banner for a Mayan exhibit at the Kimbell Art Museum. I made a note to myself to go and see this as I enjoy Mesoamerican antiquities. I've even visited some of the better known places in Mexico. Fascinating stuff, and a pity. It chaps my ass to think of how much we lost to the plague of European conquerors. While the Maya still exist today, they are a pale shadow of their former selves, crushed into assimilation by an arrogant, ignorant, and unworthy master. I even wish they Maya had had some unknown disease that could have killed of those Catholic bastards, or at least let them live long enough to take it back to Europe to decimate their population. <Ecstatic shudders>

That made me think: we need some new conquistadores, and the more I thought about this while I was driving, the more I loved it. Why I loved it had to do with all the sickening piety gushing out of the worthless evangelicals that re a genuine plague to our country. They are extremists. They are zealots. Those people need be destroyed with prejudice.

Here's the scenario:

One day, out the blue and without warning, aliens arrive. They seem benign but they possess a power that goes beyond our comprehension to a diety-like level. In very short time and without warning, rhyme or reason, they become malign and: butcher half of the population and all of the clerical people; destroy the religious and some non-religious cultural texts; make us learn a single, new language; make us worship alien god(s) that have no meaning; put us to work as slaves harvesting our natural resources; give us a disease that kills off a quarter of the remaining population; then leave us to flounder like a dying fish on a beach. If we are lucky, they will destroy our planet when they sail on to other shores.

My pleasure at this situation is derived from the anguish of the pious, crying to their sky pasta daddy, and the silence of the response. With so much of the culture destroyed and poorly remembered, enhanced by a death penalty for anyone practicing the old ways, how can one not love the irony dealt to these pasta lovers-an irony lost on their ignorance.

Suffer, bastards.

Taberchuckle time!

Since I've moved, Taberchuckles are a luxury, so I was pleased that this came about recently but displeased that it was at the expense of expedient driving. Shivering in antici......pation, I slowed the car as the sign came unto view:

Don't let your praying knees get lazy.

Taberchuckles are a hit-and-miss and this one is a miss. There's nothing to drive me apoplectic but it is still funny. Active subservience is better than lazy subservience. Passive subservience is just wrong; you might as well be an animal.

So far as I know, Catholics (east and west) and orthodox satanists are the main groups who kneel when praying. It's part of the ritual but I suspect they will tell you that it really doesn't matter. They probably do the majority of their personal praying standing up, sitting down, and even on the toilet.

My guess is that the message is just a subtle reminder to "remember the subservience and keep at it." Want The Noodly One to give you a minute? On your knees. Want Timmy to have perfect attendance at piano lessons? On your knees. Have something petty and selfish you want to ask the sky daddy? On your knees. Kneeling makes you small in many ways but they all make you the size of a child, handily reinforcing your place when dealing with your sky daddy.

Like the Taberchuckle itself, this one was kind of weak but I'm just dusting off the cobwebs.

Free Speech and religion

Who would dare support anti-defamation of religion? 1) It's subjective. 2) Laughing at retards is fun!

After all, at one point, especially with religion, any discussion about a new faith was dangerous. You could be killed for it. Hypocrites. Their take is defamation is intolerance. I say anti-defamation is intolerance.

It's the same side of the same coin.

Source: Pharyngula

Pat Condell: Wake up, America

Bravo.

Pat Condell: The arrogance of clergy

Back from the summer vacation season and on fire!

...And Misery for All

Link: http://tinyurl.com/yf9gs5u

An amusing trial is going to occur in California early next year. In it, the constitutionality of the state's recent Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage, will be assessed. Unfortunately for the backers of the porposition, they are in Judge Vaughn Walker's court. There was today a preliminary hearing with the attorneys, as highlighted in the link at the top. Judge Walker indicated that he was not amused by the position of the group and would take the opportunity in court to examine some of the rhetoric often spouted in the defense for such a ban.

I laughed several times reading this article, mostly at the simple questioning offered that garnered highly-polished I-don't-knows from Charles Cooper, attorney for the backers. After the hearing, the Mr. Cooper said that he would be ready with material to support his case.

Allow me to help you, the people who support this ban: you won't and never will for one simple reason: your position is wholly indefensible from a legal standpoint. The only thing you can say if that this is your belief or opinion. It will save a lot of time if you simply come out and say that it is the faith of your clients. Then the case can be thrown out for being patently stupid, bigoted, and faith-based.

One of Judge Walker's questions was regarding how same-sex marriage causes harm to mixed-sex marriages. Again, Mr. Cooper did not know. There is no harm to mixed-sex marriage except for that which is caused and perceived by the individual. After all, if same-sex marriage is allowed...where will it end? Mixed-species? Mixed-matter-states? Whom does it harm? No one. You may not like it, but that does not make it wrong or bad.

What business is it of yours, anyway? You do not want the government involved in an issue like this because, inevitably, it will decree something that you do not like. Then what? You gave them the power and now you are the victim. I would offer the same advise to you then as I do now: suck it up, jackass.

But marriage is a sacred institution. Bullshit. Humans were forming community-acknowledged pair bonds long before some asshole priest/shaman/witchdoctor decided to create a lucrative line of work for himself—and a few bucks—by pretending to solicit blessings from the Sky Daddy over the union. Humans form pair bonds. Even alligators form pair bonds, and they are hundreds of millions of years old—or 5000 in young-Earth years. That's all you need. Probably, after a few centuries of study, you might find that pair bond couples have greater success because of the nature of the pair bond. Maybe not much more, but its more.

Do pair bonded couples marry? Of course, and that's fine because at no time will I say that anyone cannot marry if they want. Marriage is not a sacred institution, unless you really want those blessings on the union. What are the typical blessings: children (have more sex, use the rhythm method, have sex every day - works for atheists and everyone else), a prosperous home (work harder or at least do work that rewards you in other ways beside money - works for atheists and everyone else); love and respect (don't be an asshole, plus love and respect your partner - works for atheists and everyone else). Hmm. I'm not seeing anything special here. Sounds more like magic and talismans and spells and potions are needed - you know, pagan stuff. Of course, if blessings are not part of the equation then make an appointment with your local Justice of the Peace.

I'm curious about these supposed blessings on the union: do you have to be a member of the cult to receive them or does the Sky Daddy dole them out to anyone? What about a couple who are not married, who have several healthy children, whose lives are rich, and who love each other to the end of their days? Did Sky Daddy secretly bless them? What if they are Buddhist? Atheist? Deist? Zoroastrian? Pastafarian? Stop me when this starts to sound really silly. Too late.

I'm sure that the big item that will be presented is the harm to children of same-sex parents. They are the same arguments used to prevent same-sex couples from adoption. Harm? What harm? Again, the only harm is that which is perceived by these bigots. They're not raising them like I do my children! Thank The Great Noodle! Maybe they won't be bigots.

Children of gay (from here the term "gay" shall encompass the full gamut of GLBT) couples may be brought up with different values than yours. Values are an individual's own pursuit. So what? Who is to say that such an upbringing is bad? The bigot? That person is biased. The same-sex couple? They're biased, too. Why don't you ask the kids once they are adults? Track them. Collect data. Analyze it. Collect more data. Compare those results with the first. Have other people conduct the same experiment with a different population and compare those results. Then, and only then, can you make a pronouncement about harm or benefit.

Aw, crap. That's the scientific method and this is a religious matter.

In any case, it's none of your fucking business any more than it is the government's. Those people are individuals. They have the freedom to change their own minds, express their own opinions, form new opinions and pursue their lives however they want. Just like you. The latitude you enjoy is available to everyone. It's starting to sound like you are opposed to people having values different from yours. Values are not part of a package deal when you reach adulthood. You build them over time. They change as a person experiences life. A person with fixed values is unable to grow.

Marriage is the cornerstone of the family. You might be on to something there...um, nope, that's bullshit, too. Maybe to you, marriage is required to have a proper family but have you looked at that position from outside your little bubble? How pathetic is that? You have to have this artificial construct imposed onto your life in order to be a good parent—I do not say couple because marriage is about children, you know, the traditional reason? You really believe that unless you are married, you will be a horrible parent and unable to love your spouse? Does that not sound incredibly wrong?

Marriage is about commitment. Again, I ask, are you completely unable to do this without the construct of marriage? Have you ever interacted with any of the other seven billion people on the face of the earth in your life? You have?!?! Were you civil to them? Were you polite? You weren't standing in front of a mirror, were you? So how is that any different from the way you would treat your domestic or life partner? If you are a civilized human, the answer is none. Incidentally, commitment to whom? Your spouse or your Sky Daddy? Who or what is more important? That sounds more like a three-way, and not the kind of three-way I was wanting.

Are you worried that those kids will not be brought up in a household of religious faith? Guess what, gays have faith, even if you think your faith ignores them. It is faith, after all. It is what you make of it.

Are you worried that the children of same-sex couples will become gay? There is no proof of that. If you want proof, I already told you how to measure that. It should only take a few hundred years to have a good data sample so that you can postulate a theory. It will never be any more than a theory because it involved humans, and humans are infinitely complex. Well, some are. To further clarify, so long as there is one variant, it remains a theory, never a law.

Whatever the results of the case, frankly, I do not care because, as the comedian is so fond of saying: everyone deserves the same opportunity to be miserable. If Judge Walker cock-punches these crackpots (please!), it will not matter to them because they will wrap themselves in their faith and know that they were right. That's fine. That's faith: a psychological mechanism to tell yourself that everything will be okay, despite the situation.

For my final swing of the bat, I have to ask: is this really that important? Is this more important than poverty? Is this more important that hunger? Is this more important than education? Is this more important than life where basic human dignity is oppressed? Stupid question, I know. Without suffering and ignorance, you cannot have faith.

I can only shake my head in incredulity. For the record, I don't think that marriage is completely bad, just unnecessary for civilized humans. If it helps some people behave themselves and/or be happy, more power to them? When the marriage fails, that okay, too. They're only human.

Since it's on topic: An opinion piece

De theocracy natura

The blogs that keep tabs on the religious nut jobs have plenty of quotes from their mouthings off that make it clear, though not always explicit, that these bozos would like nothing more than to live in an American theocracy. I have some thoughts on that.

There are few true theocracies in the world because they require one hundred percent commitment from the populace. Most of them, to obtain that amazing support, require such control and capitulation of the will and individuality of the populace that the very thought of it gives a rational, free individual a WTF moment.

Perhaps these evangelical lunatics should consider this: evangelicalism exists because it does not like the way the mainstream version of the cult works. Their crap is derived from Protestantism, which exists because they did not like the rules of Catholicism. Even evangelicalism has splinter groups who interpret things different from the other dangerous cults. So here is the question: whose rules are law? What about people who do not agree? Do they form a subcult? Are they afforded the same privileges? Of course not. One thing that religions is completely against is options. So that should tell them, if their rules are so awesome, why is it that some people do not like them?

It happened before and it will happen again: one person will be to differ with the ideals of the mainline faith and cause it to splinter. Will that be treated as a civil war? Considering how rabid some people in this country are about their faith, armed conflict is inevitable.

To offset this, they ruling cult will probably opt for a least-common-demoninator for of the rules. Keep it simple enough that everyone is happy. The problem with that, is that no religion works that way.

For a contemporary perspective, look at the goings-on in Iran. That is an example of an extreme cult running a theocracy and what happens when some people don't have their head up their ass. Eventually it will happen. There is no way that a system can maintain that kind of tension. Humans adapt and change. Humans that do not are dead anyway.

Asshole alert: Newt Gingrich

Source: blog.au.org

I read this article on the toilet this morning, strangely appropriate.
The gist of it is that the former Bozo of the House was speaking to the Republican Senate-House Dinner about, as described in the article, the importance of religion in American political life and public policy.

AU does their usual, wonderful job talking about this and how vile and inappropriate his words were. Beyond this, however, there are a few items that rub me the wrong way. Specifically, it involves the quotes from Gingrich that were delivered at a separate conference.

Specifically, this quote drives me nuts: Reignite in people an understanding that the heart of your life is subordination to God! The heart of your life is seeking God’s will, and that all of us are weak and vulnerable, all of us make mistakes, but that all are welcomed by a loving God.

Foremost, the language used here is rather sad. It is self-demeaning and pitiful. How could such a person have come to a position of leadership with he is, as he says in his own words, "weak and vulnerable?"

Secondly and just a disturbing is the fact that this is Gingrich's own, pathetic interpretation of his jebus cult cell. It is not everyone's opinion. What makes him think that others feel as pathetic as he does? Probably more do that I would hope. However, one thing that is systemic of the jebus cult-and other general cults-is the game of one-upsmanship that goes on where one cultist tries to show that it is more devout than the others. This act makes for a dangerous game that results in extremism. Extremism of any kind is not good-it's evil.

The other thing about his quote is exemplified by "subordinate" and "weak and vulnerable." What is this? What is usually weak, vulnerable, and subordinate? A child. Is this man not an adult? Stupid question. There are a variety of reasons why someone would act this way but I believe that it is mostly about shirking individual responsibility or culpability. When the cultist does something stupid that makes other livid, they have their imaginary friend to run to, who will like them and say nice things to them when everyone else calls them an asshole.

Taber-Chuckles: 2009-05-19

So many posts, so little time.

I can appreciate the attempt to give an encouraging message to the sheep but the short space makes for some damn funny clauses. This is one of them. I could be wrong, and this is the pure message as intended. Yikes. Let's start, as I always like to do, by analyzing the language. It is always a source of amusement.

Actually, the clause itself is fine but for two single words, pay and sacrifice. They give it a rather explicit meaning that is disturbing. All the speaker had to do is move who up to the first line and replace pay with make to make the clause acceptable. As it is, it reveals much about the psychology of the writer.

A person can make a sacrifice or pay a sacrifice. Paying for something implies that the object is something that the person wants but must perform a transaction to acquire it. Something tells me this is an impulse buy. Maybe they person wants the item but do they really need it? My main problem with the use of pay here is that the transaction involves the individual's life itself, as opposed to some form of legal tender or bartering with something of equal value. One's life is not. Apparently, the boogieman for this cult only accepts payment in death.

Next is the word sacrifice. Sure sacrifice fits the usage, if you change the verb, but one could just as easily-and effectively-use the word price. It definitely works with the verb pay. Pay the ultimate price has a shred of dignity to it. Make the ultimate sacrifice has a bit of dignity but also implies that the person knew that this would happen, thus performed the act willingly. That would be okay, but we are dealing with cultists, so there is an understanding of deception and/or coercion. What is the reward? Death. What is the cost of this reward? Death. Sounds like a death cult to me.

Then there is the other aspect of sacrifice. Of the two possibilities, this is usage is definitely literal: the person is literally sacrificing themselves, just like in the "good ol' days." People nowadays still make sacrifices but they are most often figurative. Wearing one's Sunday finest to the cult facility is a figurative sacrifice that pagan cults used to do. The Athenians would offer bolts of fine cloth to Athena as a sacrifice. What they do today is the same thing, just figurative—and very pagan. With this statement, however, it is implied that it is literal. It has to be-it is a death cult.

Towards the end of the writing, the word willing leapt out at me. There is not much to say about it other than it reinforces the supposition of dumb sheep being tricked into marching to the slaughter. All I can do is shake my head at the potential lost if these people were not fettered, neutered, and shamed into submission. They have no true respect for themselves.

On the other hand, taking the message as it reads, it is asking the reader to extol the virtue of someone so delusional as to believe that one person having holes shot in to their carcass makes a substantial difference. How many does it take? When have enough sheep been sacrificed to make one say: "maybe we cannot win this one?" Such arrogance. Such stupid sheep. Sounds like a match made in....ah, crap.

Regarding Dr. Tillman

I told myself that I was not going to comment on the vicious, hypocritical murder of Dr. Tillman, the late-term abortion doctor in some flat part of the country.

Considering how much gawd-lovers scream about abortion and children, do they not realize that children and reproduction technically are their gawd's curse to women and punishment to both men and women? Of course it is. To be funny, one could say that it was paradise because you could walk around the house naked all day. However, there is nothing to indicate that A&E were copulating prior to acquiring knowledge, prior to which they were as dumb as the moss on a stone. They did not have offspring in the garden. Ah! Maybe they could not because they were not sexually mature. That would be interesting in light of religious figures and children.

One thing that does bother me about religious justice is that a mundane instrument is required at all. There were a number of jerk-offs who said that their gawd would not want this murder victim to live. Obvious IT did because IT had not killed it before then. After all, IT is omniscient and omnipotent, but more importantly, IT is obviously lazy. Maybe IT decided to test IT's cultists with the existence of the murder victim. By committing the murder, the cultists are telling IT that they do not like that test. Well, isn't that convenient. If you tell your teacher that you don't want to take their stupid test, they say No problem. Here's your F. This shit does not jive with love thy neighbor and turn the other cheek, probably because it's inconvenient and isn't compatible with their burning intolerance. I wish they would follow the turn the other cheek line. More children from the insane cultists need to be aborted, as late-term as possible. Gas it right after the live birth.

There have also been a number of cultists who have publicly endorsed this murder. They should be rounded up and executed, young and old, rich and poor, cultists and cult leaders. They are all criminally insane. Now, we will not give them lethal injection, or electrocute them, or decapitate them, or shoot them, or hang them. Let's use their own favorite: burn them alive. All the others kill more quickly than burning but that is not the real reason to use it. We use it for the blood-curdling screams one hears coming from the flames. Real, protracted pain and suffering. They deserve only the best.