The burning of the Quran and the waters of common sense

Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you. - Yoda

For almost a month a pastor in Florida has been threatening to burn the Quran in remembrance of 9/11 and with the sole purpose of pissing Muslims off.



Now, let's get something straight here. Just because this pastor is a bigoted and hateful fucktard, it doesn't mean he is not a Christian. He believes in God and recognizes Jesus as his savior, and all the hateful things he does are done in the name of God. Under that category also falls his signs against the openly gay major.


Very, very christian attitude

Now, while I oppose to this burning, I certainly recognize that this pastor has the right to do so. As far as I know, there is nothing that prohibits him from burning books. It makes him an astronomical level asshole, but just that. Exactly like the people who want to build the so-called mosque near Ground Zero. Of course, there might be laws against burning big stuff in the open, or maybe against burning something with ink, but I haven't heard of that so far.

By now you must be thinking, what is the difference between opposing a Christian pastor to burn the Quran, and opposing the Muslim community building their community center near Ground Zero?

The burning of the Quran is meant to offend all muslims for something few did. It's a similar case when muslim extremists pretend to wage war against all Americans, or all Western society in response to the American occupation in their countries.

It's even similar to protest trade agreements or immigration laws by burning the American flags. Those who do that hold innocent people responsible for the acts of others. Which is bullshit. The have the right to do it, but it is still bullshit.


On the other hand the islamic community center is not aimed to offend anyone. There are some who get offended, but their reason to do so is that they consider all muslims responsible of what happened in 9/11. That's just a stereotype, fueled by fear, anger, hatred and that -as Yoda says - leads to suffering.

Fortunately, the bullshit has stopped and common sense has won. After Obama asked the pastor to stop this plan, he did it, and agreed to meet with the Imam who is behind the construction of the 9/11 center. I have no idea of how that dialogue will end, but any dialogue is a good start.

And here is another thing I like to point out. When the announce was made, there were many who came out to say "Thank God!". Interestingly, it was because of God that this pastor was doing all this. I said this and received a response saying that "Well, God knew all this was going to happen before we did"

Under that reasoning, then God also knew of 9/11, and did nothing to stop it. What a dick.

I won't be saying "Thank God" regarding this case. If there is anyone to thank for this, that one is Obama.

“If he’s listening, I just hope he understands that what he’s proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans,” Mr. Obama said in an interview shown Thursday on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” referring to to Mr. Jones.

“As a practical matter, as commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States, I just want him to understand that this stunt that he is pulling could greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform who are in Iraq, who are in Afghanistan,” the president said.

It feels good to have a president with such common sense. If the Muslim fanatics want to be violent enough to hold all of us responsible for what we did, let them be. We will support our measures to prevent that. But that doesn't mean we are going to behave in the same way as they do. I still think that in the United States we are not that retarded.

I have a Quran and a Bible at home. I would never burn them. On the contrary, I read them and conclude once and again of how stupid religion can be.

La Cintas Católicas: Una historia de abuso, sexo y decepción

Ayer escribía sobre la reacción de Ratzinger ante las palabras de Stepehen Hawking. Pensé en añadir esta serie de videos a ese post, pero me dí cuenta que en verdad, se merecían uno propio

En las últimas semanas el abuso sexual infantil por parte de oficiales católicos ha estado constantemente en las noticias. La aparición de varios casos en distintas partes del mundo, los cuales han tenido lugar durante décadas, ha dejado indignados a muchos. Pero lo más indignante del asunto es la actitud que los altos oficiales toman para con los abusadores. Los altos oficiales católicos prefieren callar y simplemente "transferir" a los abusadores a otros sitios, donde pueden seguir abusando menores.

A algunos les gusta pensar que estos son casos aislados. Aparentemente, no les agrada encarar la triste verdad, en que los altos oficiales, como cardenales y obispos, y hasta el mismo Papa prefieren mantener seguros a los violadores seguros, sin importarles el bienestar de las víctimas.



Uno de los casos más sonados fue el del sacerdote mexicano Marcial Maciel, el fundador de Los Legionarios de Cristo. Maciel fue investigado por abuso sexual infantil, pero nunca fue llevado ante la justicia, en parte porque el entonces Cardenal Ratzinger no fue más allá en las investigaciones.



Maciel fue muy cercano al Papa Juan Pablo II, quien tampoco hizo mucho por llevar a su amigo a la justicia. Murión sin haber pisado una cárcel.

Si alguien aun tiene dudas en cuanto a lo que la iglesia católica es capaz de hacer, presten mucha atención. El siguiente es un episodio del show de documentales "Penn & Teller: Bullshit", en donde se expone la intolerancia, odio, estupidez y abuso de poder del Vaticano. Luego de que este capítulo fuera emitido, el lobby católico parece haber movido sus influencias, de tal forma que este episodio no está disponible en DVD, ni aparece en la página web de Showtime. Junto con algunos amigos nos propusimos subtitularlo, pues este tipo de cosas deben saberse. Veanlos y difúndanlo.


.







Ciertamente, no es una cosa agradable para muchos, el ver como la institución en la que han creído por tanto tiempo es capaz de cosas tan horribles y de tanto abuso. Pero el que no se quiera ver no significa que no suceda.

The Catholic Tapes: A story of sex, abuse and deceit

Yesterday I wrote about the Pope's reaction to Hawking's words. I thought about adding a series of videos to that post, but then realized that they needed their own.

In the last years child sex abuse by Catholic officials have been constantly in the news. The appearance of such cases in different parts of the world, during decades make the cases outrageous. But more outrageous is the attitude high authorities and the Vatican take regarding it. Catholic officials prefer to keep silent and simply "transfer" abusive priests to other locations, where they can keep abusing children.

Some people like to think that these are just isolated cases. They don't want to see the harsh truth, that high officials, such as cardinals prefer to keep rapers safe without caring for the victims




One of the most outrageous cases is the one of Marcial Maciel, a Mexican priest founder of the Legion of Christ. Maciel was investigated for child sex abuse, but was never brought to justice, in part then Cardinal Ratzinger did few to nothing to keep the investigations.



Maciel was very close to Pope John Paul, who also didn't do much to bring his friend to the justice. He died without going to jail.

If you still have any doubt about what the Catholic Church is capable of doing, pay attention to the next videos. This is an episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit in which they expose the Vatican and their bigotry, hatred, stupidity and power abuse. After the episode was broadcasted, the catholic lobby seems to have moved its influences. The episode is not available on DVD, and it doesn't figure in Showtime's webpage. So take a look at it while you can.







Certainly, it's not a happy thing to see. But just because you feel uncomfortable when watching the hypocrisy and cynicism in the Catholic Church, it doesn't make it less real.

El Imperio (de Ratzinger) Contraataca

Como ya muchos deben saber, hace unos días Stephen Hawking declaró que no era necesario un Dios para la creación del universo. Como era de esperarse, esto causó llanto y crujir de dientes entre los creyentes, que veían a uno de los pesos pesados de la ciencia moderna darle en el piso a sus adoradas creencias.

Era predecible también que los líderes religiosos salieran a decir algo a favor del dios creador del universo, el cual Hawkins, uno de los físicos de más renombre en el mundo, acababa de probar innecesario

Las declaraciones más sonantes han sido:

"Creer en Dios no consiste en taponar un agujero y explicar cómo unas cosas se relacionan con otras en el Universo, sino que es la creencia de que hay un agente inteligente y vivo de cuya actividad depende en última instancia todo lo que existe" – Rowan Williams, Arzobispo de Catnerbury

"La ciencia trata de explicar y la religión, de interpretar (...). La ciencia desarticula las cosas para ver cómo funcionan. La religión las junta para ver qué significan. Son dos empresas intelectuales distintas" – Jonathan Sacks, Rabino en jefe de la Congregación Unida Hebrea de la Unión

“Si uno mira el Universo, todo apunta a la existencia de un creador que le dio origen” – Ibrahim Mogra, presidente del Consejo Islámico de Gran Bretaña

Pero la mención más importante sobre el asunto no viene de otro si no de el mismísimo Papa Benedicto, en su carta para la XXVI Jornada Mundial de la Juventud 2011:

“En efecto, hay una fuerte corriente de pensamiento laicista que quiere apartar a Dios de la vida de las personas y la sociedad, planteando e intentando crear un “paraíso” sin Él. Pero la experiencia enseña que el mundo sin Dios se convierte en un “infierno”, donde prevalece el egoísmo, las divisiones en las familias, el odio entre las personas y los pueblos, la falta de amor, alegría y esperanza”

Va a ser difícil encontrar otro texto escrito por otra persona con tanto cinismo en tan pocas palabras. Ratzinger acusa al laicismo de crear un “infierno” lleno de egoísmo y odio. Sin embargo, la iglesia católica ha sido una de las grandes fuentes de egoísmo, y odio, al pretender que los homosexuales no obtengan los derechos y protecciones que merecen, o equiparando la ordenación de las mujeres con el abuso sexual infantil.

Pero hay más

En cambio, cuando las personas y los pueblos acogen la presencia de Dios, le adoran en verdad y escuchan su voz, se construye concretamente la civilización del amor, donde cada uno es respetado en su dignidad y crece la comunión, con los frutos que esto conlleva.

No necesita dársele muchas vueltas al asunto para darse cuenta de que cuando Ratzinger quiere que los pueblos acojan la presencia de Dios, lo que en verdad pretende es que se le preste atención a él. Dios no va a bajar a hablar con los pueblos, ni a explicarnos cómo debe interpretarse la Biblia. En una sociedad como la que pretende Ratzinger, la dignidad nunca podría ser alcanzada, así como no podría en un régimen totalitario en donde unos tienen más derechos que otros y ningún mandato puede ser cuestionado.

Finalmente

“Hay cristianos que se dejan seducir por el modo de pensar laicista, o son atraídos por corrientes religiosas que les alejan de la fe en Jesucristo. Otros, sin dejarse seducir por ellas, sencillamente han dejado que se enfriara su fe, con las inevitables consecuencias negativas en el plano moral.”

Obviamente a Ratzinger no le agradan los que se rehusan a ser simples borregos que necesitan de un pastor. Pero en efecto, existen quienes desean retener su identidad de católicos, pero a la vez buscar un mundo mejor a través de la ciencia y derechos humanos para todos. Naturalmente, este concepto es negativo para Ratzinger.

El desdén de Ratzinger por los hallazgos de la ciencia es increíble. Más aun, estas declaraciones vienen luego de una tormenta causada por la salida a la luz de varios casos de abusos sexuales que envuelven a la iglesia católica y a sus altos mandos, casos que aun siguen saliendo a la luz.

No es sorprenderse entonces que ni los británicos ni los escoceses deseen financiar las visitas del Papa a sus países. Nadie quiere a alguien que prefiere guardar la reputación de su institución en lugar combatir los abusos sexuales que esta comete. Nadie en sus cabales, al menos.

Ok, mientras solamente sea uno

Ratzinger's empire strikes back

It’s been already almost a week since Stephen Hawking declared that God wasn’t necessary for the existence of the universe. Predictably this caused weeping and gnashing of teeth among believers, who saw their beliefs and their God being beaten by one of science's heavy weights.
As expected, religious leaders from around the world came out to defend their “creator” from being stripped of such title by one of the most important physicists in the world

The most remarkable declarations are as follow:

“Belief in God is not about plugging a gap in explaining how one thing relates to another within the Universe" - Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury

"Science is about explanation. Religion is about interpretation. The Bible simply isn't interested in how the Universe came into being" - Lord Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth

But the most important mention about this issue comes from Ratzinger himself in his letter to the World Youth Day Madrid 2011 (a text that was kind of hard to find in English)

Indeed, there is a strong current of secularist thought that aims to make God marginal in the lives of people and society by proposing and attempting to create a "paradise" without him. Yet experience tells us that a world without God becomes a "hell": filled with selfishness, broken families, hatred between individuals and nations, and a great deficit of love, joy and hope.

It's going to be hard to find such cynicism in so few words written by someone else. Ratzinger accuses secularism of creating a godless "hell" filled with selfishness and hatred. Yet, the Catholic Church has been one of the greatest sources of selfishness, where all the power is concentrated in a group of people, and where the money is served not to help those in need, but to save priests who have sexually abused kids. The Catholic Church has, and still inspires hatred towards homosexuals, by denying them the same rights heterosexuals have, or by comparing women's ordination as priests to child sexual abuse.

But there is more

On the other hand, wherever individuals and nations accept God's presence, worship him in truth and listen to his voice, then the civilization of love is being built, a civilization in which the dignity of all is respected, and communion increases, with all its benefits.

You don't need to thing a lot to notice that when Ratzinger wants nations to listen to God's voice, he actually wants nations to listen to his voice. God isn't coming down to talk to us, or to explain to us how the Bible should be interpreted. In such society dignity for everyone will never be achieved, since the Catholic Church refuses to acknowledge the same rights for women and gays.

Finally

Yet some Christians allow themselves to be seduced by secularism or attracted by religious currents that draw them away from faith in Jesus Christ. There are others who, while not yielding to these enticements, have simply allowed their faith to grow cold, with inevitable negative effects on their moral lives.

Ratzinger obviously dislikes those who refuse to be mindless sheep. But there are some who, while retaining their identity as catholics, look for a better world based on science and human rights for everyone. Naturally, this concept is seen as negative by Ratzinger

Ratzinger's arrogance and disdain for science when it contradicts his beliefs are astonishing. This comes just months after the sexual abuse scandals in which the Catholic Church has been involved, with some cases still surfacing during these days.

It's no wonder that neither the British, nor the Scotish want to pay for Ratzinger's visits to their countries. After the irresponsible way in which the Catholic leader has handled the child sex abuse cases in those countries, it's understandable that the public don't want to fund his visit. No one likes a pedophiles enabler in their country. At least no rational and moral person.

Quotable Quote LXXIV

"The Pope is the poster-boy for secularism. Every time he opens his mouth, he makes the case for a secular society so much more compelling."

Christopher Brookmyre

The Mosque Wars

At this time, most of us know that there is a fuss all over the US regarding "Park 51", incorrectly named by the unreliable media "Ground Zero Mosque". As many point out, this is an issue that has divided the United States given the "controversy" surrounding it.

By the way, "controversy" goes between quotation signs because it shouldn't be such, especially considering that the US laws protect freedom of religion so that anyone can worship the way they want.

Well, the issue has divided not just the US, but also many atheists have had a say on this. Unfortunately, a lack of belief in God does not mean necessarily a clear and objective view of the world. As an example of this, Pat Condell



For the non-believer who is eager to pick up his weapons and go on an unholy war against religion, this is music to the ears. However, to the one who sits and think thing thoroughly without letting his own anger and fear take over, there is usually a problem. The Amazing Atheist has that position:



First of all, I'm no fan of neither of them. I've seen a couple of Condell's videos and seemed boring to me. Sorry, an old man in front of a camera in not very appealing to me. His message is not bad, but not appealing enough. Regarding The Amazing Atheist, well, it's the first time I've seen one of his videos and, I have to say that a chubby guy walking towards a camera is also not very appealing.

So, having stated that I'm no fan of any of them, I don't see hard to agree with The Amazing Atheist. First of all, because it's a rational position. They both despise Islam, but while Condell extends the wrongdoings of some extremists to all its adherents, The Amazing Atheist recognizes their right to do as they want, as it is stated in the US constitution.

Condell calls a Slippery Slope by stating that a "mosque" (which is not a mosque) will be present in the Ground Zero Area (actually, two blocks away from the site). Political correctness can also be a problem, but it shouldn't be when there is a law backing the "politically correct" action. Then there is just bigotry.

Both of them agree that such act is in bad taste, but while Condell pretends that just "bad taste" is enough reason to prohibit the construction of the building, The Amazing Atheist recognizes that, despite their assholery, it's their right.

Condell also says that such a violent religion like Islam is not capable of providing spiritual relief. I think most of us non-belivers can say the same thing about most religions, if not all. The problem is, there are many who do find it, and while some of them might do abhorrent acts based on it, those who don't shouldn't be punished for them.

I could keep comparing both videos, but won't do that, they are there for you to see. What I would like to do is point out one last thing. The Amazing Atheist says that Condell is a one-issue voter. He doesn't give much explanation, but I understand that Condell (and many others) will take the "anti-religious" position, no matter what. No matter what liberties are at stake, and no matter what rights are being taken away.

Just like those who were happy and saw no problem on the Patriot Act being enforced and taking one step towards a police state.

I do like my right to be a non-believer. I also like my right to be able to say it. That is what I intent to protect and stand for. Not just whatever agrees with my own ideas, but the right that enables me to have those ideas and not hide them. Condell doesn't seem to understand that.

Someone who does understand and makes me very happy she does, is ZOMGitsCriss. It's just delightful to see such a beautiful woman with a strong opinion on such a hard topic, and yet, keeping them within the realm of the reasonable.



Certainly, to see her is much better than the other two

Quotable Quote LXXIII

"Catholic bishops have always understood that control of the formation of the minds of children is a necessary condition for the survival of their Church as a powerful institution."

Eamon McCann

El Mapache vs. Actividad Paranormal

Hace tiempo que he estado queriendo hacer este experimento. Hoy finalmente pude hacerlo. Hoy vi Actividad Paranormal solo, de noche (son las 2:36 AM) y en completa oscuridad. ¿La idea? Poner a prueba cuan escéptico soy.

No voy a negar que me asusté en algunas partes, como cuando se azotan las puertas, o cuando se oyen ruidos súbitamente. Tampoco voy a negar que se me erizó un poco el pelo en la escena final. Y tampoco creo que podría negar que si escucho un ruido medio raro afuera, voy a pensarlo dos veces antes de salir a abrir.

Sin embargo, no creo que esto sea indicio de falta de escepticismo. Creo que cualquiera se asusta con ruidos súbitos en una película de terror o suspenso (mi escena favorita de este tipo es en Aliens, cuando los soldados están siendo rescatados y de pronto uno de los aliens mete la mano al vehículo).

Actividad Paranormal juega bastante con el factor desconocimiento. Uno no sabe exactamente qué está pasando, pero la película te da toda una gama de cosas que podrías imaginarte, cosa que lo pone a uno nervioso gracias a la autosugestión. Y cuando algo pasa, ni siquiera se explica exactamente qué fue.

Caso curioso, me sentí más asustado cuando se barajaba la posibilidad de un fantasma, que cuando se sugirió la de un demonio. Supongo que la idea de un demonio la relaciono con la representación de la antitesis de Dios hecha por la iglesia, y por eso me parece menos real. Pero la idea de un "algo" fuera del conocimiento y que depende mucho del concepto de la persona es más escalofriante, pues tiene menos parametros por los cuales guiarse y es más desconocido.

No creo que al apagar la computadora no pueda dormir. Sin embargo, no tengo sueño, pero eso se lo atribuyo a que la película no fue aburrida y a las galletas de chocolate y al Monster que me tomé antes de verla.

Por último, si tuviese que considerar un siguiente paso, este tal vez sería el de la ouija. ¿Seré tan escéptico como para animarme a jugar con una tabla de oujia? Aunque sé que Dawkins, Sagan y Hawking se reirían de mí, creo que lo pensaría dos veces antes de hacerlo.

En fin, tengo que dormir. Vere si encuentro algo aburrido en el Youtube. Y me acabaré el paquete de galletas.

Nada más por esta noche.