Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Deranged: American Family Radio’s Bryan Fischer: ‘No More Mosques, Period.’ Previous entry: Assimilate to which America?

Living in a bad satire

ChoadsReligion

I’m beginning to think the whole “Ground Zero mosque” thing is a hoax being played on the American public to highlight all the worst tendencies in our political culture.  I had to ban a couple of dingbats from the blog last night for vile hate speech and, weirdly, plagiarism (one guy was copying and pasting right wing screeds and passing them off off as his own—-he was found out because astute commenters noted the improvements in both his spelling and grammar). It’s kind of surreal having the same folks who go down to the WTC to have grinning tourist shots taken in front of it before they scurry away from the natives to go see a Broadway show start lecturing everyone else on how to memorialize 9/11.  Then, in what could pass as a parody of right wing pseudo-histories, you have Ross Douthat—-who is a convert to Catholicism, mind you—-trying to revise history to make the Know-Nothings (and, as I pointed out, the KKK) look like they were a generally good group of folks who were just really convinced that assimilation was for the best.  Then you have cowardly simps in the Democratic party like Harry Reid actually thinking they can score political points by joining into the racist and frankly stupid manufactured shit storm. And now the inevitable squalling about how “both sides” are to blame.  Gov. Chris Christie’s remarks are so incredibly stupid that I’m forced again to wonder if this isn’t just a conspiracy to play some ridiculous hoax on the public. 

If you were trying to write a over-the-top hyperbolic parody of American politics, and you came up with this story, you would toss it in the trash for lacking subtlety.  Newt Gingrich’s remarks especially would be considered too silly to work as effective satire.

One thing that this should put to bed is the ridiculous narrative about how the Tea Crackers are secular libertarians who are indifferent to the culture wars.  Of course, this whole crap pile has also demonstrated that our political culture is infinitely stupid, so I’m not holding out hope.  This entire thing has demonstrated that right wing America holds beliefs about Islam that are so strange and so wrong as to compete with the sort of things that have been believed about Catholics and Jews in the past.  I didn’t realize until recently that when wingnuts screech about “Allah”, they weren’t just employing a rhetorical flourish for their racism.  No, they actually seem to believe that “Allah” is an entirely different god than the one worshiped by Christians, and many of them seem to think that Allah is a real god—-or I suppose they’d say a demon—-that is competing with their god for worshipers.  What makes this a particularly strange belief is that there are legitimately religions in this world that actually worship a different god than the one of the Christians, but Islam simply isn’t one of those religions.  But having decided that Islam is, in their eyes, a pagan religion worshiping a demon, right wingers then go off to theorize about what kind of demon “Allah” is, which is almost assuredly where Mark Williams’ highly specific “monkey god” crack came from. 

I’m not pointing this out to make some kind of full-throated defense of Islam, though from the garbage I’m seeing aimed at me on Twitter and in email, I suspect a lot of right wingers have convinced themselves that there’s way more “secret Muslims” out there than Barack Obama.  I’m actually a pretty outspoken atheist.  I find all religions to be preposterous, but I find them to be equally preposterous.  Right wingers keep making arguments about how Christianity (and they’ll occasionally hat-tip Judaism) is a better religion than Islam, something I find akin to arguing over whether or not vampires are more fun to hang out with than mermaids.  But this brings me to another point about some of the really strange right wing beliefs about Islam that have been exposed in all the squawking over the Cordoba House—-they attribute subversive powers to it that are near-magical.  There seems to be a belief that Islam has hypnotizing powers over people that can only be resisted by flagrant bigotry, and that those of us who don’t exhibit said flagrant bigotry are being recruited and we don’t even know it.  That kind of view goes a long way to explaining the baffling panic of “creeping” sharia law, as if American judges and lawyers, when exposed to spell-binding examples of sharia law, will become helpless and unable to enforce the secular laws of a country that explicitly sets out to separate church and state.  It also goes a long way to explaining why so many right wingers seem convinced to their bones that American feminists fucking love it when fundamentalist Muslims push the sort of misogynist rules on women that American Christian fundamentalists only wish they could get away with.  I cannot tell you how many folks have sent missives to me that indicate that they believe I’m a supporter of female genital mutilation, which they also seem to believe is both exclusive to Muslims and universal to Muslims.  (It’s not—-it’s a tradition that predates Islam, and regardless of the debates about what the passage that references it in the Koran means, it’s clear from the passage that the tradition predates Islam.) In reality, Islam is basically like all other religions—-whether or not you believe in it over another religion is based almost entirely on whether or not that was the faith you were raised in, with a few converts on the side mostly existing because of intermarriage, and even fewer converting because they felt like it.

There are few pleasures in life like being lectured by someone who, in the name of Jesus would have you forced to bear one child after another against your will, about why your supposed love of cutting off clitorises—-a love you don’t actually have—-is anti-woman. It makes you long strongly for the mermaids vs. vampires discussion. 

What I will say is all this crap is exactly why, even though it hurts people’s fee-fees, I think religion is a fundamentally bad idea.  Not that you can’t have racism in a secular sense, but the introduction of a bunch of ancient, preposterous magical stories into this whole thing is just making everything worse.  This controversy has blown up because there’s so many right wing nuts who are dedicated to claiming that their pile of lies about a supernatural being that doesn’t exist is good and true, whereas the Muslim pile of lies about a supernatural being that doesn’t exist is demonic and evil.  Meanwhile, those of us who are standing up for tolerance and diversity are kind of in this position where we have to say, “Look, due to the nature of mystical bullshit being all made up, of course there are going to be competing and differing kinds of mystical bullshit.  But when it comes to the real world, we’re more alike than different, and there’s simply no reason we can’t get along if we want to.”  Of course, most people use nicer words than that, especially if they go home themselves and follow a line of mystical bullshit.

Fred Clark quotes Thomas Jefferson saying the same thing in a nicer way:

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 11:03 AM • (130) Comments

I don’t think I have much to say besides ‘agreed’.

Though it strikes me that the right attributes similarly compelling powers to the ‘gay lifestyle’ too.

Comment #1: Sivi  on  08/17  at  11:17 AM

The “Islam is magic” thing is really out there, and I’m glad you brought it up.  Remember the hubbub about the Khalid Sheikh Muhammad trial?  It seemed like if we brought him to New York to stand trial, he would give a speech in court that would hypnotize a billion people, grow to be 12 feet tall, break out of the courthouse, impervious to bullets, and go on a rampage that Godzilla would have been jealous of.  The fact that two guards and handcuffs would have been more than enough to stop him seemed to be outside their imagining.

There are too many Americans who keep embarrassing the rest of us.

Comment #2: Loch Ness Monster  on  08/17  at  11:19 AM

There seems to be a belief that Islam has hypnotizing powers over people that can only be resisted by flagrant bigotry, and that those of us who don’t exhibit said flagrant bigotry are being recruited and we don’t even know it.

We’ve been here before. In the Cold War many believed that just a handful of Communists in key positions—say a Hollywood producer or two, a few advisors in the State Department—could undermine an entire civilization and hand us over to the Soviets.

The paranoid mind has a long tradition in America. It is a very human failing, and yet always baffling. The persistence of it speaks to something fundamental not only in our culture, but to the human psyche.

Comment #3: Theron  on  08/17  at  11:22 AM

It’s really just Fox News trying to see just how stupid Americans can be.  Rupert Murdoch probably has a billion-dollar bet with someone that he can get a beauty queen elected President.

Tell me when your neighbor’s place is available.  My devotions are nondenominational, so you and Marc would be welcome to join in.  Does it get good sun?  I don’t want to blind you with pasty bits.

Comment #4: 3letterjon  on  08/17  at  11:27 AM

I’ve always loved this GYWO cartoon about religion: http://mnftiu.cc/blog/images/war.007.gif

Comment #5: Rumblelizard  on  08/17  at  11:27 AM

Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

You’d think so, until you saw my neighbors. They’re lovely people. Just not physically so.

One of the most obtuse right-wing assholes in the Chicago Tribune came out with a column this morning about how the mosque should be allowed. He repeated all the bigoted tropes about how Muslims behead people in the name of Allah, etc., but then grudgingly conceded: “the opposition about the mosque is fueled by discrimination against this religion.”

Stuff like that makes me think (hope?) this issue won’t have legs.

Comment #6: Bitter Scribe  on  08/17  at  11:29 AM

Amanda, is that picture for real? Its almost surrealist in quality and on close examination seems to be a parody of Christian pop than an actual Christian pop album.

Theron at 3: I’ve long maintained that Islam is the New Communism for the American right. Many Europeans aren’t that better with it either with the minaret and veil bans going on in Europe. Sometimes I wish I had a literal clue-stick. It would be useful.

Comment #7: Lee  on  08/17  at  11:30 AM

Too true, too true.  The reality is that many of the American Talibangelicals (among whom I grew up in Oklahoma) are VERY insecure in their faith and thus terrified of any potential challenge or competition.  It is also true that conservatives always attribute mystical powers of persuasion/seduction to their enemies (look to the anti-communists of the 50s-70s).  As to the neighbors, just let me say that you really do not want fat old men like myself dancing naked in the backyard.

Comment #8: DrDick  on  08/17  at  11:36 AM

Lee—although there is old-fashioned xenophobia going on, I also am quite certain that part of the anti-Islam sentiment in Europe is due to Islam refusing to play nice and be neutered the way Christianity was.

Comment #9: Punditus Maximus  on  08/17  at  11:37 AM

something I find akin to arguing over whether or not vampires are more fun to hang out with than mermaids.

See, if you’d said “werewolves” we could be having a perfectly ridiculous Team Edward / Team Jacob pissing match in the comments, but apparently you don’t love us enough for that.

Comment #10: Zifnab25  on  08/17  at  11:37 AM

@Lee—also, Poe’s Law.

Comment #11: Punditus Maximus  on  08/17  at  11:42 AM

Amanda,

While I truly feel you are grossly misrepresenting Christianity, I even more deeply acknowledge that you are accurately describing the Christianity put forward by its most obvious public spokesfolks. Is there an opposite to a strawman? Where you are attacking, not a false interpretation of someone else’s beliefs, but in fact, correctly attacking a false interpretation they made up and are defending? Yikes.

Because it’s pretty clear to me that most of Christianity’s brighter lights throughout history would not only agree with you, but push you aside to object even more strongly to them.

That said, I would far rather have Muslims living, working, and voting near me than this sort of asshole right wing Christianist.

Comment #12: Lymis  on  08/17  at  11:43 AM

We’ve been here before. In the Cold War many believed that just a handful of Communists in key positions—say a Hollywood producer or two, a few advisors in the State Department—could undermine an entire civilization and hand us over to the Soviets.

Don’t forget, when the Iranian Revolution happened in 1980, the US was absolutely convinced that it was sponsored by the Soviet Union and was therefore a Communist plot that had nothing to do with religion.  Now that the Soviet Union has collapsed, the right has just moved “Islamists” into the spot where Communists used to be.

There was always a religious element in the opposition to Communism (or, as the right preferred to call it, “godless Communism”).  That’s how we ended up with “under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance.  So it makes perfect sense to me that the right could smoothly swap fear of Islam for fear of Communism.

Comment #13: Mnemosyne  on  08/17  at  11:46 AM

Punditus- Christianity in Europe wasn’t really that neutered except in the Protestant and Orthodox countries where the church always tended to be a tool or toady of the state. In the Catholic majority countries, the Roman Catholic Church always thought to maintain their power whenever the State went against them and always tried to act independent from the State rather than as an agent of it. Its just that a lot of people stopped being actively Catholic.

Islam isn’t being neutered because it was never under state control to begin with in Europe. Part of the problems with Islamic immigrants is that you have a minority from very conservative and religious societies interacting with a relatively more libertine and very secular majority. Interactions are bound to be awkward at best, especially since European governments seem clueless on what level of assimilation to go for.

Comment #14: Lee  on  08/17  at  11:46 AM

Well said, Amanda. And as always, better than I could have said it. Is it possible to agree with something more than 100%?

Comment #15: Mark  on  08/17  at  11:46 AM

As to the seductive magic power of Islam, isn’t it intriguing that now Islam has the same magic power to corrupt the American Way of Life™ that Communism and Teh Gay had before it? (and Suffrage and Demon Rum, and Witchcraft and so on.)

It’s like they have some sort of Apocalyptic Mad Libs where you just fill in the name of the Menace.

Comment #16: Lymis  on  08/17  at  11:47 AM

Punditus at 11: Part of the problem is that the people in the picture really look like men cross dressing as women from the 1960s rather than women. The hair looks to be wigs and the faces have a mannishness that can’t be covered up by even the best attempts at cross-dressing. So I can’t decide if the people are women or cross-dressing men and if its the latter than its a parody. Thats why I need clarification from Amanda.

Comment #17: Lee  on  08/17  at  11:50 AM

Don’t forget that these Christianists refuse to see the separation of church and state to begin with, because they want to impose their own view of religion on everyone, so they think that if they somehow don’t “win” their imaginary religious war, they’ll be forced to live under the yoke of a religion they fear.  Because they can’t grasp, in the first instance, that they never had the right to impose Christianity on us heathens to begin with.

Comment #18: sam  on  08/17  at  11:50 AM

#9: “Play nice and be neutered”? I uh… hadn’t really heard the Reformation put in those terms before. Ditto, I’m sure all of those nice-looking, burka-wearing beggars I saw on the Paris metro were just waiting for the proper moment to go full Jihad.

This entire “Ground Zero Mosque” thing makes me feel like I’ve wandered into a Klan rally… it is really an all new level of overtly unhinged drama from the Right. Amanda does a better job with it here than I have… which has mostly just been to stand, mouth-agape, in shock.

Comment #19: humanadverb  on  08/17  at  11:50 AM

You know, about that Allah isn’t God thing - it always blows my mind, because as I was raised (staunchly Catholic), I was taught that what “there is only one God” meant was exactly that - that there was only one God, and as a result, anyone who encountered God in any form, pantheon, or tradition was interacting with the same God, the only one there was.  Not that “our God™ is the real one and all of yours are fakes.” Took me quite a while to understand that this interpretation was incredibly uncommon.

Comment #20: Lymis  on  08/17  at  11:52 AM

If you were trying to write a over-the-top hyperbolic parody of American politics

It’s been done, and in only five years it all came true.

Comment #21: xebecs  on  08/17  at  11:53 AM

What’s my gross misrepresentation of Christianity?  Saying that it’s not the one true religion?  Look, my feelings about Christianity, like I said in the post, are identical to my feelings about Islam.  Most religious people believe all other faiths are false, I just see them and raise them their own.

Comment #22: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  11:53 AM

What’s frightening to me is the way moderate Muslims are seen as more dangerous than the violent militants. Daniel Pipes once suggested that the “lawful Islamists,” which advance their goals through non-violent activism are an even greater threat to Our Way Of Life than al-Qaeda. It’s aburd of course, because even if such Muslims do hold reactionary social views it is much preferable that they never resort of violence.

The Muslim who “Americanizes” his religion is the one Islamophobic wingnuts fear the most for multiple reasons. He proves their thesis on Islam being inherently violent wrong. He exposes Christianity to unwelcome competition. He deprives them of a useful bogey-man. He gives Muslims a greater voice in opposing imperialist policies against Middle Eastern countries. And finally, he contributes to the melting pot without totally giving up his own religious identity.

It is worth noting that many early 20th-century anti-Semites thought that the Jew that “blended in” with the society of the country he resided in was more of a threat than the Jew that “self segregated” and openly displayed his ethno-religious identity. So it is today with Muslims, who are accused of taqiyya (i.e. lying) everytime they try to fit in by condemning terrorists or liberalizing their religious doctrines.

Comment #23: AJB  on  08/17  at  11:54 AM

#16

As to the seductive magic power of Islam, isn’t it intriguing that now Islam has the same magic power to corrupt the American Way of Life™ that Communism and Teh Gay had before it? (and Suffrage and Demon Rum, and Witchcraft and so on.)

Conservatives generally assume that the populace are a bunch of authoritarian followers who are just itching to be led. Their fear is that the followers won’t care who leads them, or where.

Comment #24: atheist  on  08/17  at  11:55 AM

Lee, I do believe that record is real.  And I think the only reason you think those women look like men is they’re not wearing make-up.  Big hair + no make-up is a really common look amongst fundamentalist Christians, especially the old school ones in the 60s.  They believed that make-up was a sin, but apparently had no problem with hairspray.

Comment #25: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  11:56 AM

While I truly feel you are grossly misrepresenting Christianity

Oh yawn.  You can’t keep writing religion a pass on the grounds of “misrepresentation”.

Not all people are assholes.  Naming yourself a token supporter of a given religion doesn’t radically alter your personality.  So claiming that Christianity gets a pass because the faithful aren’t assholes to a man strikes me as somewhat hollow.

Not all Christian beliefs are bigoted, obnoxious, or idiotic.  But highlighting the non-crazy Christian beliefs doesn’t really sell me on the faith if the crazy shit comes as a package deal.  Sure, “Stealing is bad” seems like a good moral foundation on it’s face.  But pair it with, “Now give me 10% of your income” and “Only an ordained Priest can accurately interpret the holy book” and you’ve lost me.

Ultimately, Christianity IS what is put forward by it’s most obvious public spokesfolks.  There isn’t a double super secret silent majority Christianity you can point to that has wide spread political clout, a vast contingent of followers, and a non-crazy doctrine of faith.  The Jerry Falwell / Pat Robertson / Pope Childmolester the First religion IS the Christianity we are forced to deal with on a daily basis.  There’s no whitewashing that by pointing to your nice Episcopalian neighbor and saying, “But she’s not like that.”

In the grand political scheme, that doesn’t fucking matter.

Comment #26: Zifnab25  on  08/17  at  11:58 AM

We’re a week away from the anniversary of one of my favorite moments in the peaceful neutering of Christianity in Europe. Mark your calendars.

Comment #27: humanadverb  on  08/17  at  11:59 AM

I honestly think in a lot of cases this is a situation of you protest too much. Or the Big Lie. Or whatever you want to call it.

I think that a lot of Christians who are leading the charge against this bullshit have religious beliefs that, if you were to take them outside of their religion..a blind reading, so to speak, would go squarely in the demon worshiper trope bucket. They believe in a judgmental, jealous deity who would smite into eternal torment anybody and anything that opposes it.

If that’s not a demon I don’t know what is.

Comment #28: Karmakin  on  08/17  at  12:01 PM

I noticed that Lonnie couldn’t resist making the ‘Amanda never attacks Islam for its record on women and violence’ snipe at you. It’s the sort of crack they’ve made at PZ even though he’s said some fairly forthright things about Islamicism.

So I’m pleased you’ve stated where you stand on ALL religion and tolerance of nutty sky faiths. Good show.

Comment #29: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  12:04 PM

“While I truly feel you are grossly misrepresenting Christianity, I even more deeply acknowledge that you are accurately describing the Christianity put forward by its most obvious public spokesfolks. Is there an opposite to a strawman? Where you are attacking, not a false interpretation of someone else’s beliefs, but in fact, correctly attacking a false interpretation they made up and are defending? Yikes.”

Why always this?

If someone says they’re a Christian and seems to believe that Jesus was the Son of God, I think they’re beliefs just became Christian beliefs. The same goes for nice, liberal Christians who read the Sermon on the Mount and also for the conservatives who are sure Jesus hates the same people as they do. Asking atheists to agree with you about which is the true Christianity is odd, though I personally hope you win. The world would be a better place if everyone who’s a Baptist became a Unitarian.

Comment #30: witless chum  on  08/17  at  12:05 PM

I despise the concept of “flyover country” because it gives right-wingers an excuse for victimwhining (I’ve never heard anybody on the left actually sneer at flyover country, but the right wing can’t get enough of the concept) and because it lets them off the hook for their fucked-up beliefs (“what do I know, I’m just a redneck in flyover country”).  Yet, to the extent that there is such a self-identified region… flyover country on New York after 9/11: “Nobody beats my wife but me”.  I really don’t think it’s any more complicated than that.  New York, having been brought low (supposedly) by 9/11, is now a canvas on which they play out their militarism and cultural hatred.

Before I gave up on trying to be a progressive Catholic, I particularly hated the right-wing Protestant fundies (like, I presume, Ross Douthat) who converted to Catholicism because they saw the church’s hierarchy as a great vehicle for enforcing their hateful politics.  There are/were actually progressive strains in Catholicism, but convert-scum are joining with the existing right wing of the church to stamp out those tendencies.

Comment #32: Flora  on  08/17  at  12:07 PM

Wait, who was talking about flyover country?

Comment #33: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  12:10 PM

If the ‘no true Scotsman’ argument is applied by Christians like Lymis, why do so many of the nutcase god-botherers seem to have a platform and even political clout?

Why do the nutters rule the roost and thereby get to define Christianism? I’m not conviced, as Lymis suggests, that these folks are a tiny minority. Rather, they reflect an underlying trend of fear and loathing that is very influential in American Christianism as a whole.

Comment #34: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  12:14 PM

I’ve come to appreciate that the “both sides” argument is more than just an intellectually lazy argument used to absolve oneself of educating oneself on the facts. I believe it is a term that aging folk who used to be progressives or liberals use to hide the fact that they are growing more conservative in their old age. They can’t admit to themselves or to others that they’re actually tacking right, so they make up this B.S. about how they’re “independent” (seriously, I’ve never met an independent who wasn’t just a closet republican) and how the liberals are JUST AS BAD as the conservatives.

Comment #35: Mighty Ponygirl  on  08/17  at  12:15 PM

I noticed that Lonnie couldn’t resist making the ‘Amanda never attacks Islam for its record on women and violence’ snipe at you. It’s the sort of crack they’ve made at PZ even though he’s said some fairly forthright things about Islamicism.

When conservatives make those kinds of statements, I often hear them as frustration that they simply do not understand what drives liberalism and liberals. Which is a good thing, because if the accuser did understand he would use that understanding in a destructive fashion.

Comment #36: atheist  on  08/17  at  12:16 PM

I noticed that Lonnie couldn’t resist making the ‘Amanda never attacks Islam for its record on women and violence’ snipe at you. It’s the sort of crack they’ve made at PZ even though he’s said some fairly forthright things about Islamicism.

Just a few days ago a letter-to-the-editor appeared in my local paper in which the author demanded that just once, just one, she’d like to see a Muslim leader condemn terrorism.

/facepalm

Comment #37: Theron  on  08/17  at  12:20 PM

When we live in a country where (warning: Conservapedia link) the laws of physics can be made political and a front-line in the culture wars (‘cause you just know those physicists are all part of a sekret plan to undermine America) of course you’ll get a lot of ridiculous hoo-ha about the correctness of one religion over another and how the Constitution was written by and for Christians, etc.

The insane Christian Dominionists want their Gilead so bad they can taste it.  And they won’t hesitate a second to roll over any of us who might object.  The fact they are the mirror-image of radical Islam just adds to the absurdity and the horror…

Comment #38: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  12:20 PM

Amanda at #33: no, nobody brought it up other than me.  I meant that while I think it’s a bogus concept, it actually works as a label for the people who self-identify that way.  Who are the same ones who are playing out their hatred on New York post-9/11.

Comment #39: Flora  on  08/17  at  12:22 PM

Isn’t saying all religions are the same just like saying democrats and republicans are just as much bad as each other? I mean if you are going to live your life according to the lessons you read in a fiction aren’t some of the fictions better than others? Like jedis. I think star wars a new hope is much better than genesis and that includes the star trek version. I guess jedis have their issues too with all the chopping off of limbs but really what religion doesn’t have that issue. I can guarantee you you wouldn’t find a jedi in a SUV hurling racial epithets.

I put it to the thread that jedism (?) is a superior religion to Catholicism because jedis try to live in harmony with nature and would just like it if you chilled out and considered others while catholics think we are all bad and that we have to listen to and obey the rantings of a weird sexless man in a funny hat to become good.

Comment #40: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  12:32 PM

#38

Maybe we should start buying luminiferous aether… I hear its on the way up.

Comment #41: atheist  on  08/17  at  12:33 PM

Amanda @ 25, I remember as a young schoolgirl watching all the high school girls walking to their high school located on my street, with their bouffants hair-sprayed to death. At this particular school, the big thing was the bouffant worn by the leftmost girl on the album cover in your photo. Everybody wore it just this way, with a tiny Goody bow in the very center, in both front and back, in neon colors. Make-up was optional, but big teased hair was required.

It didn’t matter if you were one of the sluts or one of the xtians. It was The Big Thing.

Comment #42: LCforevah  on  08/17  at  12:37 PM

All religions are not the same. Some are clearly crazier than others. Scientology, anyone? And let’s face it, Jihadist nutters are very, very scary in a way that, say, the Church of England is not.

But all religions, at their core, are built on the same bedrock of irrational superstition.

Comment #43: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  12:42 PM

“Maybe we should start buying luminiferous aether… I hear its on the way up.”

I’m waiting for humorism to come back.  I figure I can make a killing selling bloodletting supplies and equipment to the large number of barber surgeons we’ll need to handle medical care in these United States…

Comment #44: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  12:44 PM

Grossly misrepresenting, like Martin “On the Jews and Their Lies” Luther? Or more like Paul “Slave Be Obedient to Your Masters” of Damascus?

Comment #45: draeton  on  08/17  at  12:48 PM

Thank you, Amanda, for bringing up the crazy that is the fear of Imminent Sharia. This has absolutely mystified me, and I keep waiting for somebody to explain to me how in hell that would happen. But no explanatiions are given, and gosh if it seems like even asking for an explanation gets you put on some sort of ‘secret Muslim’ list.

It’s like Sharia is the mist from the Stephen King story. It comes out of nowhere, without warning or explanation, blankets the town with fog and giant bugs, and leaves you trapped in a supermarket waiting for the world to end.

Comment #46: benvolio  on  08/17  at  12:52 PM

Isn’t saying all religions are the same just like saying democrats and republicans are just as much bad as each other? I mean if you are going to live your life according to the lessons you read in a fiction aren’t some of the fictions better than others?

Isn’t saying that religion is fiction saying that, in this sense at least, they are all the same?

Yes, Dems and Reps are all the same; They are all politicians. But the specifics of their politics are at least somewhat different. Just as Islam and Christianity and Star Wars are all fiction but differ on the details.

Now, personally, I disagree with your stance on Jedism. It’s a genetic aristocracy defending a corrupt system. Say what you want about the Empire, but you don’t have to be royalty, loaded up with midichlorians or posses a sad devotion to an ancient religion to reach positions of power. There’s room to move in the Empire! Like they said about Napoleon’s Grande Armée; there’s a marshal’s baton in every private’s knapsack.

Comment #47: Sarcastro  on  08/17  at  12:54 PM

They believed that make-up was a sin, but apparently had no problem with hairspray.

I’m embarrassed to admit this sentence perfectly encapsulates my high school aesthetic.

Flora,
There are/were actually progressive strains in Catholicism, but convert-scum are joining with the existing right wing of the church to stamp out those tendencies.

It’s something about converts in general.  The fervor, it’s…disturbing.  I grew up in a conservative area and never really saw progressive Catholicism, though my history book said it existed.

Comment #48: bomberE  on  08/17  at  01:04 PM

As far as I’m concerned the prequels never happened (I guess some people feel that way about the new testament as well and polite people don’t give them shit about it) so that genetic aristocracy thing just isn’t true and the flaws in the senate are a separate issue to jedism.

With that being said if you are going to compare religions in a way that isn’t us and them you are kind of doing it from an atheistic standpoint. Like, Islam scores a 6 on creating social harmony while catholicism score a 5 but catholicism does better on measures of art. To think stuff like that you are thinking like an atheist aren’t you?

Comment #49: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  01:05 PM

#49

To think stuff like that you are thinking like an atheist aren’t you?

Not really… you may be thinking like a sociologist. As far as I’m concerned, the atheist thought process is more like: “Different religions are very creative & all but they are also total bullshit.”

Comment #50: atheist  on  08/17  at  01:10 PM

“Say what you want about the Empire, but you don’t have to be royalty, loaded up with midichlorians or posses a sad devotion to an ancient religion to reach positions of power.”

...unless you want to be the Emperor, and then you need all of those things, plus years of training in The Dark Side, to succeed.  Ultimately there’s no room for us ordinary folks even in fictional universes.

Sooner or later (and high enough up the ladder of success) all religions turn into exclusive clubs for which only a select few will ever have full membership.

As Driftglass likes to point out: There is a Club.  You’re not in it.
...

Comment #51: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  01:14 PM

</blockquote>I had to ban a couple of dingbats from the blog last night for vile hate speech and, weirdly, plagiarism</blockquote>

Looks like quite a bit happened here since I called it a day. I have to admit I’ll miss the entertainment value of lonnie, who seems to be one of the banned. But I’m confident that another humourless religious prig with dreams of Gilead will step up to replace him.

“i know nothing” was previously banned under another name (“tom from florida”?), so it was only a matter of time. But I’m sure our neoConfederate eliminationist attention whore will return as well.

All religions are not the same. Some are clearly crazier than others. Scientology, anyone? And let’s face it, Jihadist nutters are very, very scary in a way that, say, the Church of England is not.

But all religions, at their core, are built on the same bedrock of irrational superstition.

Quoted for truth. Well said, Lee.

Thank you, Amanda, for bringing up the crazy that is the fear of Imminent Sharia. This has absolutely mystified me, and I keep waiting for somebody to explain to me how in hell that would happen.

It can’t as long as Americans are devoted to defending the Constitution. Ironically, the biggest whingers about “Imminent Sharia” are also those Xtianists who hold the greatest antipathy toward the main impediment to Sharia’s gaining equal standing with secular law, namely the Establishment Clause of the Bill of Rights.

Comment #52: Gracchus.  on  08/17  at  01:15 PM

@48: Emmett, I don’t know.  I think the recent wave of fundie converts to Catholicism is more motivated by the logistics of the hierarchy—getting access to all those supposedly unquestioning sheep—than any sincere theological fervor.  They, and the right wing faction that has always existed and is now ascendant, are trying hard to suppress the diversity of opinion that existed in the church when I was growing up, and to play up the blind-obedience-to-authority side of things.  Not to hijack this thread, especially because I’m done trying to be a part of the church or to defend it from political criticism.

Comment #53: Flora  on  08/17  at  01:16 PM

Sooner or later (and high enough up the ladder of success) all religions turn into exclusive clubs for which only a select few will ever have full membership.

And if you dare reject the belief from which you’ve been excluded, some arsehole in a dark robe will use his power to hurt you, and then joke about finding your lack of faith disturbing.

Comment #54: Gracchus.  on  08/17  at  01:23 PM

Not really… you may be thinking like a sociologist.

A sociologist a variety of scientist (arguably) and scientists are atheistic. Suspending the idea that they might be true or false and dealing with them in the categories you deem appropriate seems pretty atheist.

Comment #55: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  01:27 PM

Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

Yeah, you’d think so, but the reality is not so great. <|^(

Comment #56: Eric_RoM  on  08/17  at  01:35 PM

Isn’t saying all religions are the same just like saying democrats and republicans are just as much bad as each other?

Only if you believe that policy cannot affect reality because there is no reality and that this is all just a dream.  Your assumption that some fictions are better than others relies on the false premise that these fictions are static.  The lived reality is that religious people claim their god says whatever they personally wish was true.  In this, all religions are basically equal.  The notion that Christianity is some edifice against misogyny is undermined by the way the Catholic church acts in the real world, for instance.

Comment #57: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  01:36 PM

Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

Clearly, you haven’t seen my neighbors.  Besides, winter worship would be outright dangerous here in MA (or even where you are).

Comment #58: helen w. h.  on  08/17  at  01:36 PM

Trust me sisster no ones gonna force you to bear anything, calm down. 

See? They have absolutely no respect for the truth.  This is basically an empirical fact that he’s denying.  If the American Taliban gets their way, the women will absolutely, empirically be forced to bear children.  That’s what an abortion ban is for.  That’s what forcibly depriving people of contraception is meant to do—-make the unwilling have children they don’t want.  Wingnuts are stupid, but they’re not that stupid.  They know that depriving people the means to prevent childbirth = forced childbirth.

Comment #59: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  01:41 PM

1) sorry about riffing on the same thing everybody else did.

2) the album cover: YES! Cross dressing!  The one on the right could EASILY be Stephen Fry!

Comment #60: Eric_RoM  on  08/17  at  01:41 PM

JohnMckay:

Gosh why did it take you so long to get to Jesus is forcing me to have babies. Trust me sisster no ones gonna force you to bear anything, calm down. I misspelled a couple words so you can keeep up the superiority ruse.

It’s not your spelling that’s going to get you banned, fella. It’s the glee you take in lying directly out of your asshole, as well as the inability to distinguish between insult and argument.

You could at least come up with some original insults. Or, for that matter, some original lies.

Comment #61: Dan, Grand High Emperor of Bananas Foster  on  08/17  at  01:46 PM

I misspelled a couple words so you can keeep up the superiority ruse.

Trust me, that’s wasted extra effort on your part. Anyone who’d deny people medical procedures or pharmaceuticals because an Invisible Bearded Sky Man™ says so pretty well advertises his irrationality.

Comment #62: Gracchus.  on  08/17  at  01:46 PM

Now, personally, I disagree with your stance on Jedism. It’s a genetic aristocracy defending a corrupt system.

Coupled with an anti-humanist ascetic philosophy that denies human emotions as legitimate and promote detachment from human affairs. I dare say its defense of a corrupt system comes only from Jedism’s inherent moral cowardice and inability to actively work towards social change.

The Sith had the right idea, until they got so corrupted by resentment towards the Jedi council so that their individualist philosophy became nothing more than the justification for their campaign of hate against it.

“Peace is a lie, there is only passion
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.”

Comment #63: BlackBloc  on  08/17  at  01:47 PM

Of course, most people use nicer words than that, especially if they go home themselves and follow a line of mystical bullshit.

I actually have used the phrase mystical bullshit and I do follow a line of mystical bullshit myself.  Regarding the naked dancing neighbors, you haven’t seen some of my neighbors.  I will be intolerant and draw the line there.

Comment #64: Mike the Mad Biologist  on  08/17  at  01:47 PM

#56

scientists are atheistic.

No, actually, scientists aren’t necessarily atheistic at all. Sir Isaac Newton was extremely religious. So was Gregor Mendel. For a list of Christians who were also famous scientists, check out this link: “List of Christian thinkers in science”. You could easily make a similar list for all the other major religions. Note that the list I linked to has scientists who lived in the 20th century, or are alive today.

Suspending the idea that they might be true or false and dealing with them in the categories you deem appropriate seems pretty atheist.

I disagree. Atheism isn’t the suspension of judgement about religion. It is instead the active judgement that religion is wrong.

Such a suspension of judgement isn’t really ‘skepticism’ either, except maybe in the ancient sense of the word. Modern skepticism is more actively judgemental.

Comment #65: atheist  on  08/17  at  01:53 PM

MP @ 35:
Maybe not IRL, but here that would be me (and if I recall correctly a few others).  I am an independent liberal/progressive.

Comment #66: helen w. h.  on  08/17  at  01:56 PM

Lots of replies in one:

@2 - If the righties really believed KSM would go on a Godzilla rampage, they’d be all about dropping him in the middle of New York. What they’re really scared of is that he’ll sit there, same some crazy shit, and then get dragged off to jail.  Just like Scott Roeder or Tim McVeigh or Eric Rudolph, their heroes.  They don’t want to see that their heroes and villains are exactly the same.

@10 - A vampire vs. werewolf thread would never end.  There is, however, a correct answer to vampire vs. mermaid - at least until humans become amphibious.  Plus, with vampires, we get the chance to go all Buffy on some of those jerks.

@15 - No.  Nor is it possible to ‘give 110% effort’ no matter how many ignorant athletes and coaches say so.

@26 - If you remove the mystical BS from the Decalogue, you get a pretty handy “suggestions for not being a dick.”  Be nice to your parents.  Don’t kill people.  Don’t fuck around if you’ve promised not to, or with somebody else who’s made that promise.  Don’t take shit that isn’t yours.  Don’t lie.  Try not to be an envious jerk.

@ Mystical Powers of Islam - The righties are at least consistent on this.  Communism paranoia has been noted, but don’t forget some of the other examples.  Homosexuals recruit straight people to be gay and destroy any chance of breeding the next generation.  Weed makes everybody who sees it into heroin addicts, and only our militarized police officers are sufficiently pure to resist the temptation of demon drugs.  Dancing is the tool of the devil to make young people want to fuck.  Whatever they don’t like has mystical powers over us poor, weak-minded fools.  Projection much?

Comment #67: libdevil  on  08/17  at  01:56 PM

Gosh why did it take you so long to get to Jesus is forcing me to have babies.  Trust me sisster no ones gonna force you to bear anything, calm down.

Yeah, nobody’s forced to bear anything - as long as they lead an appropriately sexless life.  Yes, they want to take away the option of not having babies - but only from people who have sex.  Silly, hysterical woman.

Comment #68: libdevil  on  08/17  at  02:00 PM

Your assumption that some fictions are better than others relies on the false premise that these fictions are static.

The fictions can be pretty static though. George Lucas may have cleaned up star wars and added bits into the background but its still pretty much the same thing even though now he prefers computer graphics and money to fun story. I suppose a corollary of this is that the bible is like a set of books in hebrew (?), or even a selection from a set of books and they can pretend that the books tells them x, y and z but you can make them eat their words by pointing out when it doesn’t if you have in fact read the books. Just like I can say Hans shot first. Or I guess you could say the misogyny is in the bible. Its like how old? I reckon its a pretty good bet that its in there

Comment #69: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  02:02 PM

I misspelled a couple words so you can keeep up the superiority ruse.

What a genius plan

Comment #70: atheist  on  08/17  at  02:04 PM

Presumably, just as homosexuality has a sinister seductive power over men [who are trying to ignore their true desires], Islam has the power to entice professing Christians [who don’t really believe all that shit any more than they do Islam or mermaids].

Comment #71: Dr. Psycho  on  08/17  at  02:09 PM

A vampire vs. werewolf thread would never end.

A werewolf vs. robot thread, on the other hand, would quickly reach a clear-cut consensus: we would all win, because a fight between werewolves and robots would be awesome.

If you remove the mystical BS from the Decalogue, you get a pretty handy “suggestions for not being a dick.”

True, but that would make it a Septalogue at most, which doesn’t make for that pleasant round number feeling. It would also eliminates the base pretext for religious conflicts, which is traditionally a feature rather than a bug for most organised religions.

Comment #72: Gracchus.  on  08/17  at  02:11 PM

liubdevil @68, I think “take a day off on a regular basis” is also good advice for someone trying to lead a decent life.

Comment #73: Dr. Psycho  on  08/17  at  02:12 PM

No, actually, scientists aren’t necessarily atheistic at all

Let me rephrase. I think science is atheistic and to think like a scientist you have to break with religious thought even if you come back to it later on.


To the second point. I think judgement comes after you suspend all the urgency that goes with religion and its kind of inevitable when that happens. Until you do your judgement is kind of skewed and you are thinking religiously. Unless you grew up atheist.

Comment #74: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  02:12 PM

Right wingers keep making arguments about how Christianity (and they’ll occasionally hat-tip Judaism) is a better religion than Islam, something I find akin to arguing over whether or not vampires are more fun to hang out with than mermaids.

Perfect!

I grew up in a conservative area and never really saw progressive Catholicism, though my history book said it existed.

Most of the Catholics I know are progressive, including my two aunts who are nuns. One of them was involved in the Civil Rights movement and they are both in favor of gay marriage. I’m sometimes stymied by their devout faith, but they believe, and they act progressively at least in part because of their belief.

Comment #75: maurinsky  on  08/17  at  02:41 PM

pharmakos:

Let me rephrase. I think science is atheistic and to think like a scientist you have to break with religious thought even if you come back to it later on.

Science — like religion, like logic, like everything else in human existence — is a completely mundane and ordinary social tool used by real people to achieve their own personal goals, not an abstract ideal of objective truth existing in a perfect, unbreachable vacuum chamber. Science is only as atheistic and objective as the person who’s using it.

In short, you’re not a fucking Mentat. Get over yourself.

Comment #76: Dan, Grand High Emperor of Bananas Foster  on  08/17  at  02:47 PM

One thing that this should put to bed is the ridiculous narrative about how the Tea Crackers are secular libertarians who are indifferent to the culture wars.

Indeed.

It’s kinda funny how the movement that prides itself on screeching about the federal government sticking its nose into private affairs is now pissed that the federal government won’t abuse its power by sticking its nose into a private affair.

Comment #77: DTGslu2K  on  08/17  at  03:08 PM

Not that you can’t have racism in a secular sense, but the introduction of a bunch of ancient, preposterous and entirely fabricated magical stories into this whole thing is just making everything worse.

Fixed that for ya.

Because really… Noah’s Ark, WTF?  Bringing Lazarus back from the dead?  Talking snakes?  Magically replicating fish and loaves of bread?

Are they serious?

Comment #78: DTGslu2K  on  08/17  at  03:27 PM

Just a little thing on the religious thing, there are a few religions that aren’t really out to convert the world or get everybody to go a long with them. Some religious communities just want to follow their own customs and traditions and be left alone. Granted, this is sometimes difficult to pull off in practice.

Comment #79: Lee  on  08/17  at  03:31 PM

I put it to the thread that jedism (?) is a superior religion to Catholicism because jedis try to live in harmony with nature and would just like it if you chilled out and considered others while catholics think we are all bad and that we have to listen to and obey the rantings of a weird sexless man in a funny hat to become good.

No.  Maybe if you confine yourself to Star Wars before the sequels, where Lucas radically changed his story.  Back when Luke was just a farmboy whose dad had been an ace pilot and a Jedi knight.  Back before Jedis were supposed to be celebate.  Back when Darth Vader actually did kill someone else who was named Anakin Skywalker.

After the rewrites and retcons, you have a Jedi faith that embraces celebacy and denial of emotion.  Hello St Augustine’s Catholicism.

Actual Catholic doctrine has always stated that conscience is primary, which means blind obedience to anyone, Pope or not, is not acceptable.  You’re supposed to think. 

Actual Catholic practice on the other hand, has been dominated by authoritarians with weird sexual issues, especially since V2 reforms, which drove the Correctors crazy what with the “Priests are called to SERVE the laity”

Same with Islam, actually.  It was the most egalitarian of the Abrahamic faiths, but Arabic tradition and patriarchy twisted it toward power and denigrating women.

I’m sorry, but the ‘good’ Catholics need to make a hell of a lot more noise.  It’s hard to do, since Francis Asshole George will try to squash you and the Vatican is running 2 separate inquisitions on nuns, but letting Bill Donohue talk for your faith is really unacceptable.

And as long as the Bill Donohues of the world are the voice of Christianity, that’s what Chrisitianity is, sweet little liberal Christians in their quiet neighborhoods aside.

Comment #80: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  08/17  at  03:34 PM

In short, you’re not a fucking Mentat. Get over yourself

That’s kind of extreme. I was just having a conversation. You don’t have to be such a dick.

Comment #81: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  04:01 PM

#77

Get over yourself

Dan, there’s no need to get angry about it.

#75

To the second point. I think judgement comes after you suspend all the urgency that goes with religion and its kind of inevitable when that happens. Until you do your judgement is kind of skewed and you are thinking religiously. Unless you grew up atheist.

pharmakos, maybe, you could be right. It may be true that religion would naturally wither without a sense of urgency.

In any case, I guess my point here is that atheism isn’t science, and atheism isn’t politics, and atheism isn’t a religion. Atheism is a specific spiritual outlook that denies the existence of a God or an afterlife, and affirms the mortality of the human soul.

Comment #82: atheist  on  08/17  at  04:27 PM

Amanda, I think you’ve captured that surreal feeling I’ve so often had about all these culture issues. Conversations with the fanatical seem impossible sometimes. We both use English words, and yet we speak a whole different language. It’s freaky.

So yes, it’s very much like the vampire/mermaid debate, except a lot less fun. (And for the record, I’d go with the vampires. I’m afraid mermaids would have slimy tails and smell like dead fish.)

Comment #83: Phoebe Fay  on  08/17  at  04:40 PM

Hey whatever works for you. Its not like I think you are a bad person because we disagree.

Comment #84: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  04:40 PM

See? They have absolutely no respect for the truth.  This is basically an empirical fact that he’s denying.  If the American Taliban gets their way, the women will absolutely, empirically be forced to bear children.  That’s what an abortion ban is for.  That’s what forcibly depriving people of contraception is meant to do—-make the unwilling have children they don’t want. 

I believe the reply to that would be to point out that you, an independent, psychologically-mature, adult woman in her mid-[elided]s, should not be having Teh Sex and should be punished with teh Consequences if you do open your legs.  You slut.

Comment #85: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  08/17  at  04:58 PM

“Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard. “

I love this. I mean, if you are going to believe in supernatural bullshit, why not have fun with it? Wine, sex, music. Maybe some incense. Some wacky totems for good measure.

People often accuse crossfitters of being “cultists.” I wish. Sexiest cult EVA.

Comment #86: John Joel Glanton  on  08/17  at  05:04 PM

Amanda wrote:
“Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.”

Come to the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival!  Lots of naked dancing, no god/dess required, worship optional.

Bitter Scribe wrote:

“You’d think so, until you saw my neighbors. They’re lovely people. Just not physically so.”

Lovely to see ugly-shaming on a feminist blog, and by “lovely” I mean “sucks rocks”.  It’s so feminist to insist that naked folks had damned better be ornamental.

Comment #87: maribelle  on  08/17  at  05:23 PM

I love how the fundies bleat about Sharia law, as if they aren’t trying to impose their own version of it on the US.

Comment #88: GeekGirlsRule  on  08/17  at  05:44 PM

Travelling in Burgundy, we stopped in Vezelay and stopped at the basilica. “What happened to the bas-relief?”—“Oh the Huguenots destroyed it when they swept through town. They destroyed all the statuary and sculpture, and killed the priests and nuns. Then they turned the church into a stables.”

Such acts of Huguenot iconoclasm provoked Catholic retaliation. The Huguenots vandalized Notre-Dame in Paris in 1548; the St. Bartholomew Day Massacre took place in 1572, after a series of such wars.

Comment #89: Hector B.  on  08/17  at  06:12 PM

Actually they remind me of my Mom, who had the same hairstyle and glasses in the 60s.

Comment #90: CBrachyrhynchos  on  08/17  at  06:15 PM

So far as “Christians and Muslims worship the same god”: two points.
1) Just because two entities are equally fictional/imaginary does not make them the same.  You would not claim that Harry Potter and Gandalf were the same, would you—even though they’re both imaginary wizards?
2) Within the rules of Christian theology (which admittedly most of the American Taliban don’t know), Yahwah and Allah are not the same being: Christian doctrine requires believing that Jesus of Nazareth was God/Yahwah (or part of God, or an incarnation of God… the whole Triune nonsense gives me a nose bleed); Islam acknowledges Jesus as a prophet but denies his divinity; since Yahwah incorporates Jesus as part of him and Allah does not, they are not the same entity.  And all hell is going to break loose among wingnuts when the Christers realize/admit that the same argument applies to Jews (who also deny the divinity of Jesus).

Comment #91: drickard  on  08/17  at  06:18 PM

Lovely to see ugly-shaming on a feminist blog, and by “lovely” I mean “sucks rocks”.  It’s so feminist to insist that naked folks had damned better be ornamental.

I’m not the person you’re responding to, but… Personally I don’t care if my neighbors dance naked but I reserve the right to not enjoy seeing it. They are fine-looking people in my book, but I’m not myself super into watching flapping genitalia, etc. :p

Re. science vs. religion, there is a “pure” scientific process (albeit filtered through biased humans) in a way that there isn’t a “pure” religious process. At least in science there is the idea that you should not have irrational attachments to personal beliefs and you should not ignore evidence, whereas religion is all about saying stupid fucking shit, completely contradicting all earthly evidence, and then defending it to the death out of sheer ignorant devotion. This is meant to be avoided in science, as a rule. (I mean, irrational shit happens in both arenas but religion is entirely bullshit in a way that science is not.)

Comment #92: Bagelsan  on  08/17  at  06:21 PM

I think the recent wave of fundie converts to Catholicism is more motivated by the logistics of the hierarchy—getting access to all those supposedly unquestioning sheep—than any sincere theological fervor.

I’m not so sure. There have been some notable converts in England and there some are genuinely drawn by the ceremony, and/or the conservatism of the church by comparison with an increasingly liberal CofE. And then there was the whole women priests thing which sent a bunch of them barmy.

Comment #93: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  06:25 PM

You would not claim that Harry Potter and Gandalf were the same, would you—even though they’re both imaginary wizards?

Maybe it’s more like pre- vs. post-Balrog Gandolf? I’m sure that the sufficiently devoted would argue very passionately that they are super different but everyone else is going to roll their eyes about that. :D

Comment #94: Bagelsan  on  08/17  at  06:27 PM

Gosh why did it take you so long to get to Jesus is forcing me to have babies.

Yes, but isn’t that the reality of an anti-abortion religious stance? Of insisting the state intervene to quash a woman’s right to choose?

Comment #95: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  06:27 PM

Scientists are atheistic.

I can’t go along with that. Scientists can be of all stripes. However, it’s a fact that there is a greater proportion of atheists amongst scientists than the rest of the population.

Naturalistic science does not overlap with superstition. Though the definition of atheistic is ‘not theistic’, it might be possible to define science as atheistic, though I regard that as a little exercise in weasel-wording. Given the baggage that the term atheist carries, I’d prefer to say it is secular rather than atheistic per se.

Comment #96: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  06:32 PM

drickard, just because the three major Western monotheistic religions disagree on the details is no reason to assume they can’t be referring to the same non-existent deity.

After all, major Christian groups have fought over the precise nature of “God” and his/her/its relationship to Jesus since about 5-minutes after Jesus death (if indeed there really was a real “Jesus” who was actually crucified by the Romans sometime early in the first century CE), but they all believe they are referring to the same “God”.

When I was raised as a wee fundnut, we were taught the God of the Jews, and of the Christians, and the Muslims was the same, but only we Protestant Christians were correct in how to properly worship Him and had the correct religious tome (with the correct interpretation) as our guide.  (Of course Jews feel the same about Christians and Muslims, and Muslims feel the same about Jews and Christians.  Meanwhile Hindus, Buddhists, and other non-Western believers look at all of us and think we’re crazy.) 

The idea that Yahweh, God, and Allah are just alternative names for the same deity (with different associated dogma) I didn’t think was unusual in any way…

Comment #97: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  06:47 PM

I’m with MikeEss on this. Back when I was churched it was a basic assumption that Judaism, Christianity and Mohammedanism all shared the same deity. (With only one sect possessing the true revelation of his/her/its divine word, of course.)

Comment #98: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/17  at  06:50 PM

BTW, I want to make it very clear that exactly 127 angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Anyone disagreeing with this is a heretic and must be killed as punishment for their grievous transgression against God…

Comment #99: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  06:53 PM

Scientists can be of all stripes

It wasn’t about individuals who are scientists. It was about the role of scientist\ the practice of science. I was trying to say they are two different modes of thinking. It was Thomas Kuhn\Charles Taylor kind of point which contrary to what someone above thought doesn’t mean pure truth or whatever.

Comment #100: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  07:00 PM

Lee @ 95, isn’t it amazing that the very idea that some woman could be a religious leader makes an unfortunately large number of men crazy? It really put the lie to the idea that those men see women as equal under the eyes of their Dog.

Comment #101: LCforevah  on  08/17  at  07:13 PM

Mike’s right.  The three major Abrahamic religions are referencing, quite directly, the same god.  They also all claim there is only one god, except of course when they are acting like there are other gods that are a threat to their god.  But they call those gods “demons”, a nice dodge that shows why religion is dumb.

Comment #102: Amanda Marcotte  on  08/17  at  07:22 PM

Amanda at 104 and company: There have been some misinterpretations about Judaism in this thread that need some clarification. Judaism acknowledges that Christians and Muslims worship the one, true God but believe that Christians and Muslims have gotten some but not all of the details wrong. This doesn’t mean that they are going to hell because there is no hell in Judaism and Judaism isn’t that sure about the existence of heaven either. We tend to be silent about the afterlife. Nor does Judaism really believe in Satan, demons, devils, and angels.* The Jewish cosmology is God and the physical universe. The idea of dualism, of an evil separate and opposite to God is not really that acceptable even among Jewish fundamentalists.

  *A better way to put this is that there have been Jewish folk beliefs about angels, demons, and devils but that these folk beliefs were never incorporated into official Judaism and were always opposed by the Rabbis. Seriously, if you read the Talmud you will find sections mocking beliefs in things like angels and demons.

Comment #103: Lee  on  08/17  at  07:59 PM

BTW, I want to make it very clear that exactly 127 angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Anyone disagreeing with this is a heretic and must be killed as punishment for their grievous transgression against God…

Aw shit. My experiments gave me an average of 126 angels (with an N = 3) ... but I haven’t done any analysis yet so hopefully between yours and mine the p-value will be >0.05? Then could we still be cool?

Comment #104: Bagelsan  on  08/17  at  08:36 PM

Mentats! Jedi! Two of my favorite charaters.

What I find most ridiculous about this whole debate about the placing of a Islamic center in the proximity of the former World Trade Center is that in the same mouth-breathed breath, conservatives refer to the site as sacred, while proclaiming that it would be offensive to palce said center there.

It comes down to a feeling that its “sacred for me, not for thee”.

Comment #105: EricBlair74  on  08/17  at  08:46 PM

“My experiments gave me an average of 126 angels (with an N = 3) ... but I haven’t done any analysis yet so hopefully between yours and mine the p-value will be >0.05? Then could we still be cool?”

You’re trying to use that “statistics” stuff here, aren’t you.  The US Census proved that statistics are the Devil’s work.  That’s where the blasphemous idea that someday there are gonna be more Mexicans than White folk came from.

I’ll have you know I received my knowledge of angel/pinhead interactions directly from God Himself.  (I remember it very distinctly, especially being bailed out of jail for public drunkenness by my wife.)

Maybe we need to let ThunderDome sort this one out…

Comment #106: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  08:57 PM

Aw shit. My experiments gave me an average of 126 angels (with an N = 3) ... but I haven’t done any analysis yet so hopefully between yours and mine the p-value will be >0.05?

that seems hihly friggin’ doubtful.

Besides, are you guys using an ISO-standard angel or are you just allowing any old divine supernatural entity to qualify?

Comment #107: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  08/17  at  09:23 PM

“Besides, are you guys using an ISO-standard angel or are you just allowing any old divine supernatural entity to qualify?”

You poor deluded followers of International Standards.  Real Americans use the King James Standard Angel Sizing System, which Jesus Himself pioneered…

Comment #108: MikeEss  on  08/17  at  09:59 PM

put it to the thread that jedism (?) is a superior religion to Catholicism because jedis try to live in harmony with nature and would just like it if you chilled out and considered others

Could this be the reason why jedism is not actually a religion - like in the real, actual world?

Only insane people believe jedis are real. Now if you are trying to make a point that only insane people believe in jedis OR standard religious mythology I might go along with this train of thought…

Comment #109: Nancy  on  08/17  at  09:59 PM

I was being facetious because I thought it was funny. I think jedi is technically a religion in Australia because enough people said jedi in the census.

Comment #110: pharmakos  on  08/17  at  10:13 PM

Besides, are you guys using an ISO-standard angel or are you just allowing any old divine supernatural entity to qualify?

Hmm, most of my angels were vaguely British and “gayer than a tree-full of monkeys on nitrous oxide”... I don’t know if that’s the standard but it certainly wasn’t something as vague as “any old” divine entity either; the screening process was pretty rigorous* so at least I was consistent.

*all angels had to score at least an 8/10 on “successfully incorporates vaguely homoerotic subtext when talking to a snarky demon during the not-quite-Apocalypse.”

Comment #111: Bagelsan  on  08/17  at  10:26 PM

Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

Only someone who has never been victimized by a peeping tom would find this funny.  Your privilege is showing.

Comment #112: Olgierd  on  08/17  at  10:39 PM

Within the rules of Christian theology (which admittedly most of the American Taliban don’t know), Yahwah and Allah are not the same being: Christian doctrine requires believing that Jesus of Nazareth was God/Yahwah (or part of God, or an incarnation of God… the whole Triune nonsense gives me a nose bleed); Islam acknowledges Jesus as a prophet but denies his divinity; since Yahwah incorporates Jesus as part of him and Allah does not, they are not the same entity.  And all hell is going to break loose among wingnuts when the Christers realize/admit that the same argument applies to Jews (who also deny the divinity of Jesus).

Sorry, drickard, but you’re just wrong.

All three faiths worship the same Yaweh who made contact with Abraham.  The Jews are still waiting for their messaiah, the Christians believe that Christ was the messaiah, and Muslims believe Jesus was just a prophet and Mohammed was the messaiah.

The ‘father’ of the Triune is the same deity exactly.

Whining about Catholic doctrine about the triune doesn’t help you, since that would exclude other Christian faiths—they don’t all believe in the Trinity.  What you’re talking about is nitpicking within a faith.  Like when evangelicals claim Catholics aren’t Christian—doesn’t matter how they want to whine about Catholics worshipping the Whore of Babylon and that they’re the only ones that get it right.  Historically speaking, it’s the SAME.

It’s the same god.  They all disagree about the proper way to worship the war god of the Israelites, and Jesus pretty much rewrites Yaweh as a completely different being, but Jews, Christians, Muslims, and Mormons all worship the same deity.  It’s really just sibling rivalry about who Daddy really loves best and who Daddy is going to take to the woodshed.

Comment #113: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  08/17  at  10:51 PM

I know I’m known for this, but this scrapes my inner pedant something raw.

1)  Science is not anti-Religion.  Saying so marks you as a Scientist, like a Christianist.  Science, as defined by the Scientific Method is essentially a communications revolution, not an intellectual revolution or a general enlightenment.  This sort of thing becomes clear if you read a bunch of science history, like understand what Ramanujan or Euler was all about.  Or by understanding the essentially religious foundation of major scientific fields like environmental engineering.  Perhaps an in-depth reading of the differences and conflicts between Pythagorean and Milesian intellectual groups in Asia-Minor.

2)  Also, understand this.  Science is not a technique of finding out new stuff.  Things discovered by a pure rational tend to be of much less use than you might think—economics professors get away with murder because they are not held by society to account for the pure noise of reality like an electrical engineer has to.  Schemas are what’s important, a way to filter the noise.  Science *tests schemas* and puts all of the information concerning why you believe that a schema is correct, your methods for proving it correct, and your results in a nice, consistent, and legible format for other people.  The value of Science is checking whether if you’re off your rocker or not and in spreading reliable information and schemas quickly without letting idiots hold up the process because their precious fee-fees are hurt/insecure (at least not for too long).  It is not some sort of coherent ideology, any more than TCP/IP is, and it’s not the means by which we discover major new shit.  It’s merely a means to leverage serendipity (and it’s awesome in doing all of the fill-in work after the big schema is accepted).

3)  What people have always sought were new approaches to old problems (at least when the problems grow too severe to ignore).  Religions has had an important role in providing new schemas or in providing legitimacy to new methods/ideas/schemas.  In the major sense, we don’t need religion to provide that sense anymores (in some minor senses, we do, in a de facto way).  Understanding our world and our processes and our technology demands that we give due credit—say when priests go around teaching new herding/healing/agriculture techs as Vedic brahmins had done.

4)  More than this, we have to understand human weaknesses.  Weaknesses that makes most people prone to playing the same games with scientific ideas (just look at the history of criminology for a blatant example) as they do the religious ones.  Superstition afflicts scientific ideas (like evolution means progress) just as much as they do religious ones.  Scientists will be doing yeoman’s work stomping out heresy (like climate change denialists) every bit as much as the Church stomped out Arianism—even as they eradicated pelaganism with a fury.  Politicians and businessfolk use any method at hand for getting rid of any bit of science that gives people too much liberty to determine their own sense of self—like the Chinese Great Firewall.

So please stop conflating all these ideas—that science necessarily means progress or religions are necessarily superstitious!  One only has to go to Football Outsiders to see negative progress aided by “innovative statistics”.

Comment #114: shah8  on  08/17  at  10:55 PM

@ Shah8. But surely religions *are* necessarily superstitious. Yes, they operate in the secular world and have a role to play in politics or philosophy or even science. But their core doctrine still remains rooted in superstition. And from an atheistic point of view that has the characteristic of shaping their actions in the secular sphere, and not always to the good.

Comment #115: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood  on  08/18  at  01:47 AM

Yes, they operate in the secular world and have a role to play in politics or philosophy or even science.

I would say that religious people can have a role in all these, but religion absolutely should not. It is nothing more than a collection of arbitrary rules and superstitions designed to prey on the fears of people and thus control them. I think that science has serious flaws, but unlike religion its entire purpose is not to herd terrified humans around as their leaders please. Science was not specifically crafted to do this. Ditto politics and philosophy—they can incorporate irrationality and appeals to superstition, but at least for them irrationality and appeals to superstition are bugs not features.

Comment #116: Bagelsan  on  08/18  at  03:58 AM

@#114: Olgierd on 08/17 at 08:39 PM

Only someone who has never been victimized by a peeping tom would find this funny.  Your privilege is showing.

Only someone who was unusually self-absorbed would try to make every random statement be about them. Your oversensitivity is showing.

Comment #117: atheist  on  08/18  at  07:36 AM

Yah know what, Olgierd, my mother was victimized by peeping toms when she was a kid in the late 40s and early 50s when she was sleeping in her bed and she would crawl to her parents room to tell them about the guy looking at her through her bedroom window which woke her up.

It never occurred to me to connect this to Amandas’ remark(and Amanda is a rape survivor, so I would say she knows something about victimization), please take your patronizing attitude and place it where the sun don’t shine.

Comment #118: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  08/18  at  10:26 AM

In my experience, a lot of the Christians who cry, “But all Christians aren’t like that! They’re not even REAL Christians!” are the same ones who seem to think that “Islam” is some kind of monolithic, formal entity that doesn’t have widely varied subgroups.

They believe that Catholics and Baptists can look at the same Bible and come up with different conclusions, but they can’t wrap their heads around the same thing being true for Sufis, Shi’as, and the Qur’an.

Comment #119: ttintagel  on  08/18  at  01:16 PM

“Could this be the reason why jedism is not actually a religion - like in the real, actual world? “

England is not a real place in the real world?

<blockquote>Though I do wish for direct neighbors who worship by dancing naked around in their backyard.  That would be awesome.

Only someone who has never been victimized by a peeping tom would find this funny.  Your privilege is showing.</blockquote>

I HAVE had my privacy violated in that way - as a child, no less - and I’m a little offended that you are conflating someone watching me from my yard and into my home through my window with someone seeing me from their own home through their window and into my yard.

Also, context matters.  Knowing Amanda lives in a densely populated area means that any nudist neighbors can’t really expect for no one to ever catch glimpses of them when they are outside.  Unlike, say, someone with a big backyard and high wall who I do think has a right to not have people purposely peeking over their walls.  I mean, it sucks that money often buys more privacy, but to a certain extent that’s a function of the competing rights of others vs. amount of space per person.  The solution is better allocation of resources, not to ask people to not look out their own windows.

Comment #120: jennygadget  on  08/18  at  01:38 PM

Also (on topic) I just want to second (third?) the whole idea that part of what has many conservative Christians reacting so strongly to mundane topics like building an Islamic version of the YMCA is that they really don’t fully believe in separation between church and state to begin with.  Like most people, they also suspect others of being just like them.  The fact that they see conspiracies where there are none says more about their own agenda than anything else.

And, you know, these are also the same people who go nuts when you mention the idea of bringing the pledge of allegiance back to it’s original form - by taking the “under god” part out.  Their concept of religious freedom is rather limited even before you start bringing in really exotic cultures/religions like Islam.

Comment #121: jennygadget  on  08/18  at  01:57 PM

Termagant

Who knows what they’ll think the other them are worshiping next.

Previously on Yahweh...

“Yahweh, you naughty little boy! Stop playing with your human dolls in Astarte’s garden!”

“Oh, it’s okay, he doesn’t know what he’s doing at this age.”

Comment #122: Yamara  on  08/18  at  02:42 PM

jennygadget @#122:

England is not a real place in the real world?

Narnians have been known to express doubts about England’s existence whenever their god is not personally around to terrorize them into being good.

Plus, Tash.

Comment #123: Yamara  on  08/18  at  02:53 PM

Correct address: Tash (Narnia)

The Blaspheme button seemed much more appropriate to hit than the Preview button.

Comment #124: Yamara  on  08/18  at  02:56 PM

Maybe he is evil…

You’ll have to cut & paste:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tash_(Narnia)

Comment #125: Yamara  on  08/18  at  03:07 PM

Also (on topic) I just want to second (third?) the whole idea that part of what has many conservative Christians reacting so strongly to mundane topics like building an Islamic version of the YMCA is that they really don’t fully believe in separation between church and state to begin with.  Like most people, they also suspect others of being just like them.  The fact that they see conspiracies where there are none says more about their own agenda than anything else.

This theme, where you panic the most about people acting exactly like you secretly want to act, is seen in right-wing freakouts about religion (teh Mooslims!), sexuality (teh pedo gheys!), education (teh elitists!), race (teh reparations!), war (teh Iran!) etc. so goddamn often that I honestly have a hard time not just flat-out assuming that all conservatives are fanatical woman-beatin’ human-sacrificin’ baby-rapin’ nerd-envying land-stealin’ ally-nukin’ assholes who fucking hate freedom.

Of course, no conservative has ever conclusively proven me wrong about those assumptions, either. It would be irresponsible not to speculate!

Comment #126: Bagelsan  on  08/18  at  10:00 PM

Narnians have been known to express doubts ... whenever their god is not personally around to terrorize them into being good.

That has to be the most awesome and precise description of Aslan ever.  smile

Dear C.S. Lewis,

If the Chronicles of Narnia was supposed to make me more open to Christianity, you failed miserably.

Love, Me

PS I still love the books anyway.  Or…at least…some of them.

Comment #127: jennygadget  on  08/19  at  09:35 AM

@jennygadget

I’ve decided that since I cannot really embrace the message of the books, I will at least be a purist about them.  I refrained from screaming “Don’t do it Susan, this is why you go to HELL!” when she kissed Prince Caspian at the end of the most recent film, but just barely.  Next time the movies pull that type of shit, I don’t care how many innocent children are seated around me in the theater.

Comment #128: Atheist, A Feminist  on  08/19  at  04:40 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.