Why There is No God, Reasons 42 & 43

The One True Religion™, the Catholic Church (self-named it was), instituted what it called the Inquisition (1184 to the present day) to root our false learnings and false teachings, oh and witches and sorcerers, too. Their primary instruments were fear and torture. Whole villages of people were “put to the question,” and then executed.

When the Pope got involved (the first Papal Bull on the topic was in 1199), he ignored the Bible’s teachings (Yahweh’s actually) “The one who sins is the one who will die.” —GOD, Ezekiel 18 and declared that executions, previously forbidden were now the order of the day, and the punishments would be imposed on the descendants of the condemned, also.

Now the god they claimed to worship was also claimed to be all-knowing and you’d think that such a god would let the Inquisitors know what we know now, that torture doesn’t work. Tortured people will tell you exactly what you want to hear, not what they believe.

This is especially egregious based upon what the Inquisitors learned. In France Inquisitor after Inquisitor commented on how freely peasants spouted heresies, proud of their learning. This shouldn’t surprise anyone, especially not an all-knowing god, because the vast majority of those peasants could neither read nor write. Consequently, what they knew was taught to them . . . by the damned Church! They were proud to share their learning because they learned what the priest taught them! Then they burned at the stake.

Now, based upon the easily observable facts such as these, an “all-loving god,” such as the Christian god was declared to be would take pity on the poor duped peasants and set up re-education camps or classes to get them sorted out. Even the communists did this instead of just executing all the “wrong thinkers” willy-nilly.

Two more strikes against the Crummy Christian God™ leaving us to wonder how it got its god card in the first place.

Postscript With the exception of the Papal States, the institution of the Inquisition was abolished in the early 19th century, after the Napoleonic Wars in Europe and the Spanish American wars of independence in the Americas. The institution survived as part of the Roman Curia, but in 1908 it was renamed the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. In 1965, it became the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In 2022, this office was renamed the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. (Source: Wikipedia)

Why Isn’t Populism Popular?

In my youth and political naïveté I often wondered why populism wasn’t what all Americans wanted. Didn’t we want “government of the people, by the people, and for the people?” Fast forward to today and we are being warned daily about the dangers of populism, and the words populism and populist seem to be used as slurs.

So, off to my go-to dictionary, Merriam-Webster I go:

populist 2 : a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people and
1 : a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people

Definition 1 is spot on with my original thinking, and definition 2 is also, but that’s not all there is.

Another definition is:

Populism is a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of “the people” and often juxtapose this group with “the elite.” It is frequently associated with anti-establishment and anti-political sentiment. (Wikipedia)

this too is spot-on, and

populism : political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want: e.g. “Their ideas are simple populism – tax cuts and higher wages.” (Cambridge Dictionary)

Finally, here is why the powers that be, on the left and right (actually “above” as left and right don’t really exist anymore, having been co-opted by the oligarchs) are opposed to populism. Although one could claim that the oligarchs are in favor of tax cuts and higher wages, for the rich, but the assumption here is “for ordinary people” so since such things reduce profits and thus the salaries and stock earnings of rich people, they’re agin’ it. We are supposed to be creating government structures “of the people, by the people, and for the people” but the rich are opposed to this quaint idea. They consider “the non-rich” to be “the filthy poor” who just can’t wait to get their hands on the money the rich people have piled up by hook or crook, so it is unthinkable that “those people” would be in charge. (This is why Franklin Roosevelt was declared to be a traitor to his class. He did way too much for ordinary people (even supported labor unions, eww!), at least according to the oligarchs.) Their idea is government of the non-rich by the elites (the rich and those chosen to represent them, e.g. paid for politicians).

One of their tried and true tactics is to demean the things that they want their followers to hate. They turned the term “liberal” into a slur. Social Security and even the Post Office became socialism. Church-state separation became a war on Christianity and now populism is a dirty word. The message underlying all of this is “you don’t want this, move along.” Apparently they think it is a Jedi mind trick.

What started me off on this post was a single sentence (I don’t have triggers so much as short fuses): “Populists always say popular things, so judge the man for what he’s done not for what he says.” WTF? Only populists tell us what we want to hear? Apparently they were thinking of politicians, not just populists.

Find the Meaning (It’s Right Next to Waldo)

Consider the following claim: “Society has always looked for meaning in the stories we are told. Why wouldn’t we do the same with holy texts such as the Bible?” Why indeed?

When we, as a species, started telling stories, every story had a “moral” or “lesson” embedded in it. As Daniel Quinn suggests, stories were taught to us when we began to track prey when hunting. The tracks left behind by a prey animal told a story. If the animal had a limp, the track would tell. If the track had blood droplets, the animal was probably wounded. If other predator tracks joined the trail, following the animal, then that part of the story was there to be read, also.

These stories grew over time as we became more adept at winkling out what we were seeing. If we could identify that trailing predator, it might be worthwhile to continue because even if that predator killed our prey, they might be able to be intimidated out of their kill. (Lions do it to hyenas all the time.)

And, I am sure, fathers wanted to pass on their skills and knowledge to their children. Maybe this took the form of grunts and pointing, and hand waving, but soon language entered the scene and the stories it could convey had already been told.

Stories that were entertaining were told around campfires at the end of days. Hunters might share stories, humorous in nature, that pointed out how much of a crapshoot hunting was, so the hunters could not be just blamed as being incompetent if they didn’t bring home a kill. Some stories were limited to the men, protecting their “proprietary” knowledge, as I am also sure some stories were only told by women to the women. Women, often mostly gatherers (but also hunters we now know) wanted to pass on knowledge of what was good to eat and what was lethal to their children, so they formed stories, too.

But none of the stories were just tickle and giggle stories, they all had a point, some teaching they were meant to convey. And of course this went on for millennia. And, today we are still primed to learn better from stories than from anything else.

An Aside I grieved when college textbook publishers weeded out the stories of chemists and chemical discoveries to make room for “relevant” information. It was those stories that got me interested in chemistry in the first place. Eliminating them made textbooks even more dull, and even less effective in many ways.

The first stories we have discovered archeologically, such as Gilgamesh, etc., all had points to be made, but over the past 5-6000 years we have learned how to make stories that are just entertaining, they had no points at their core, so of course, we insisted they did, resulting in Tolkien being accused of hiding Christian lessons in his books, and Star Wars being about family values and other nonsense.

Today, when we find meaning or morals in stories they are more reflective of us than the author’s messaging. And finding the messages in Bible stories is very, very problematic for Bible believers. Modern day Christian apologists are on record saying that the extermination of the Canaanites by the Israelites, as described in the Bible, is perfectly acceptable and not an abomination that we all recognize it as such. If God ordered it, they say, it had to be warranted.

Talk about being on the wrong side of reality. The Conquering of Canaan has been shown to not have happened, certainly not as described in the Bible. The invading people were not millions freed from slavery in Egypt. The slaughters described didn’t happen. Now, the people who came up with this story had their reasons, I am sure, but clearly they felt that their god ordering the slaughter of men, women, children, unborn children, farm animals, aka anything that breatheth, made their god look good. Those modern day apologists are manufacturing approvals of the fiction’s authors account of their god, they are not finding the “meaning’ embedded in the story, if there ever was one. The only meaning I can find to support the writing of such a fiction is to bolster the spirits of a downtrodden people, who have been conquered over and over by more powerful peoples to look back at how glorious their (fictional) past was. They do not always lose, they won a whole bunch of times, see.

As actual meanings go, it sucks as much as the manufactured meanings of modern apologists, which means appallingly.

The Complete and Total Destruction of Christianity

Just from the title, who do you think is responsible for this horrendous act? Atheists? (Hardly.) Communists? Satan worshippers? Who?

Well, clearly it is Christians.

Hordes of people are leaving Christian churches in Europe and the U.S., but many claim to not be leaving Jesus. They claim now to not be associated with any religion, but are still “followers of Jesus.”

So, they claim to “follow” Jesus, but what does that mean? The only source of Jesus information seems to be the New Testament, aka Christian bible. That is if you don’t include the myriad folks who put words into Jesus’s mouth in speeches, books, Internet posts, etc. Like the self-proclaimed Apostle, Saul/Paul, these people seem to claim they are getting direct revelations from Jesus. The fact that many of them are telling us this or that preacher needs a third private jet plane tells you exactly which voice in their heads they are listening to . . . their own.

So, to follow Jesus what must you do? The message portrayed in scripture is pretty straight forward and actually makes sense. Jesus recommended a three-step program (not even close to twelve). Step 1 was to repent, that is to confess your sins (and there were no confessionals at the time). Step 2 was to baptize yourself to get a clean start on your new life. This does not involve the washing away of sins, just a cleansing of mind and body. Step 3 was to obey “the Father,” aka Yahweh, aka God by obey all of His Commandments. (There are only to be found in the Hebrew Bible, since that was the only scripture at the time that listed this god’s commandments.

If all of the people were to do this they would be living in a “Kingdom of Heaven” on Earth. The “king,” of course, is Yahweh, so a theocracy for sure. And if people actually lived obeying those commandments, there would be little need of things like police and other social institutions to correct deviants. There would be no discord in society because it would be so much easier to love your neighbor, and to not murder them, when they are so much like you.

Let us not leave it there. It is clear that whatever Christianity is today, it is not what Jesus taught, not even close and I don’t think any blame for that state can be placed upon outsiders. All of the damage has been done from the inside by “Christians” who are far from being “True Christians™.”

So, if God were real, what would have happened after the creation of this realm? First of all, unwanted outsiders would not be allowed to enter this kingdom. They would be travelers on foot, or donkey back heading down a road into the Kingdom and find themselves heading away instead of toward and no matter what they did, they could not reach the Unpromised Land. Merchants sailing to the shores of the Kingdom in boats would dock, unload, do their business and leave as swiftly as they could because while the profits were nice it was clear they were not to stay.

Protected from outside influence, the Chosen People will have built their own ghetto, protecting themselves from outsiders.

Now, missions might be sent into the surrounding “nations,” with the message of how to get God’s bounty in their lands, but I don’t think Yahweh would send armies to enforce His Will elsewhere. After all, the “others” might have iron chariots.

What The Fuck is Going on with the News Media?

Recently I have seen multiple “journalists” getting their exercise by jumping to bizarre conclusions. For example, anyone who is critical of the actions of the Israeli government is an anti-Semite. WTF? What does criticism of the government have to do with “hostility to or prejudice against Jewish people”? If you are a MAGA Republican does criticism of the current Democrat governing bodies equate to criticism of the American people? Would anyone think that?

I saw Columbia University students protesting the Genocide in Gaza (their words, not mine) equated to “Friends of Hamas.” Really? Not wanting to see innocent civilians suffer and die makes them Hamas supporters? On what planet?

Why have we gone all tribal in this issue? It seems that the guiding principle is “you are either for me or against me” and there is no middle ground, no nuance, nothing other than that. (Thanks Republicans for promoting tribalism so hard for the past two decades.)

News organs are flinging incorrect labels around willy-nilly indicating they have agendas they are not supposed to have. Even declaring the legitimate government of Gaza to be a “Terrorist Organization” is suspect. Hamas was labeled a terrorist organization, in the past, but so were Zionist groups. A government might employ guerilla tactics, but that doesn’t make them terrorists. I guess journalists do. But by any such definition a government performing terrorist bombings of civilian populations, either though suicide vests or dropped by fighter-bombers would make the Israeli government a terrorist organization.

In Canada, section 83.01 of the Criminal Code defines terrorism as an act committed “in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause” with the intention of intimidating the public “…with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act.” Activities recognized as criminal within this context include death and bodily harm with the use of violence; endangering a person’s life; risks posed to the health and safety of the public; significant property damage; and interference or disruption of essential services, facilities or systems.

Sound familiar?

If Hamas is a terrorist organization, the current Israeli government (which I do not equate to the Israeli people) is one too.

Oh, the Irony, the Irony!

Are the Christian Nationalists deluded? Well, yes, but they have had help. I recently ran across this statement in a post in The Guardian:

“And in recent years, that Donald Trump – a thrice-married, profligate cheater with too many character scandals to name – is, if not a true ‘Christian’, a divinely sanctioned ‘King Cyrus’ figure sent to disrupt the secular order.”

According to Jews and Christians, it was King Cyrus of Persia that enabled the “Return” of exiled Jews from Babylon to Jerusalem (ca. 539 BCE), along with providing funds to rebuild the temple to Yahweh in Jerusalem. They refer to the “Cyrus Cylinder” as proof. This clay cylinder was found buried in the foundation of a building near Babylon. It was the habit of the powers that were to place such cylinders in those places, much like we do time capsules now, but back then these were a form of propaganda, so if the building were demolished, who built it in the first place would become known.

If you read this “scroll” it refers to a pronouncement of King Cyrus to rebuilt the temple . . . of Marduk, and not only that but the temples of many lesser gods in the surrounds of Babylon. It does not even mention the Hebrews or Jerusalem.

From its earliest times, the Hebrews were prolific liars and Christians adopted the same practices. Facts were made to be spindled, folded, bent, mutilated, or whatever to fit the company line. Propaganda was invented as an advertising technique in the early 1900s. It had been practiced for all of human history.

So, it is fitting that Mr. Trump, one of the most prodigious liars and supporters of fake news is supported by the Christian nationalists who come from a long line of liars and shapers of history to fit their desires.

They deserve one another.

Postscript The Christian nationalists are a real danger. They want to replace our democracy with a theocracy. They base this claim on the “fact” that the creators of the Constitution were Christians. By this logic, if makers of horse harness were Christians, that would make those harnesses Christian harnesses. If your baker was a Christian, that would make the bread he made Christian bread. And, if your abortionist were a Christian that would make your abortion a Christian abortion. No?

These people are dangerous liars and are to be weeded out of our society. If conservatives want to weed out Muslims carrying signs “Death to America!” then they should also be opposed to Christian nationalists carrying signs that say “Death to Democracy.”

The GOP Rebuffs the GOD

“This is what I want: to liberate those tied down and held back by injustice, to lighten the load of those heavily burdened, to free the oppressed, and shatter every type of oppression.” —Yahweh according to Isaiah 58:6

The Official GOP Response—Meh.

It’s Eerie—They Have Many Commonalities

According to Godwin’s law, short for Godwin’s Law (or Rule) of Nazi Analogies, which is an Internet adage asserting: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1, aka 100%” it is unavoidable that Hitler and Trump would be compared. Now Donald Trump fancies himself as a fascist of the highest order, so how does he compare with the major fascist of the twentieth century, Adolf Hitler. (Finally, we are there!)

Here are some points of comparison:

When Hitler became Chancellor he wasn’t interested in running the government. He refused to read briefs prepared for him.	When Trump became President he wasn’t interested in running the government. He refused to read briefs prepared for him.
Hitler despised the justice system and didn’t trust it, although it treated him with kid gloves.	Trump despised the justice system and didn’t trust it, although it treated him with kid gloves.
Hitler didn’t listen to “experts” or other leaders in his government.	Trump didn’t listen to “experts” or other leaders in his government.
Hitler read books when he was younger.	Trump didn’t even read the book he supposedly wrote.
Hitler showed loyalty to old comrades.	Trump showed loyalty to old comrades, pardoning them and preparing places for them in his new government were he to be elected again.
Hitler demanded personal loyalty to himself as an individual above all else.	Trump demanded personal loyalty to himself as an individual above all else.
Hitler demonized convenient scapegoats by blaming all of the country’s problems on them.	Trump demonized convenient scapegoats by blaming all of the country’s problems on them.
Hitler always felt he was above the law, that he was immune from prosecution.	Trump always felt he was above the law, that he was immune from prosecution.
Hitler was lazy, getting up late, taking long vacations, etc.	Trump was lazy, getting up late, taking many golf breaks, etc.
Hitler encouraged his “Brown Shirts,” aka Stormtroopers, to terrorize communists, Jews, and other undesirables violently and then denied that, even in court.	Trump encourages his MAGA followers to commit violence and then says he did not, even in court, calling them “good people,” instead.
Hitler went to prison for his part in a violent insurrection.	We can only hope Trump will do the same.
Hitler met an ignominious end.	We can only hope Trump will do the same.

Which Animal Is Most Likely To Kill You In Your State?

The question in the title above has been making the clickbait rounds of late, especially (I think) because the CDC had released statistics on that question.

But all of the responses are wrong, not even close. Some states pointed to bears, other venomous insects, still others venomous snakes, but all got it wrong. My home states, Illinois, was listed with 403 deaths, nowhere near the highest nor the lowest. But the numbers piled up in the IL by the actual champ dwarf those.

So, consider the question . . . carefully:

Which animal is most likely to kill you in your state?

And the answer for all states? You know it don’t you? It is human beings. For every person who gets killed by a mountain lion or a bear, there are hundreds killed by other humans.

Think about it.

There are over 43,000 people killed in auto crashes in just one year recently. That is also more than all of the stats provided for deaths from other animals alone.

And every year, 117,345 people are shot. With 42,654 people dying from gun violence. 16,651 are murdered. 76,725 people survive gunshot injuries. Again, just this one source outnumbers all of the “other animal” related deaths.

Then there are the suicides by other means, the people who drink themselves to death, die from metabolic diseases they could control, and on and on. The carnage is immense!—there were 3.27 million deaths in the U.S. in 2022, and if you look up, say, the Top Ten causes of deaths, you will find things like heart disease, cancer, COVID-19, and so on (Hey, Alzheimer’s made the top ten!), but you won’t find out how many were killed by other humans, because Congress has restricted the statistics that can be measured by government agencies.

Dying from being shot by gun-happy Americans is so rampant that many other countries have advisories for tourists planning to visit the U.S. Instead of Trump’s MAGA, we seem to be involved in MAIABR, Make America Into a Banana Republic.

Why I am Coming to the Point of Hating All Religions

I don’t want to hate anything . . . but . . .  I was recently watching a rather nice three-part BBC documentary on Persia and Iran. In college I took a course in ancient near eastern history but I only learned a smidgeon about Persia, so this was an opportunity to fill in the gaps in my understanding of history. Persia, one the first major empires, became over time a doormat for invaders, many, many invaders.

About 500 years ago an Islamic general decided to conquer Persia and made war and accomplished that goal. He was not conquering Persia to convert that country to Islam. Persia had been conquered by Arab invaders centuries before who had converted the entire country to Islam, essentially relegating Persia’s native religion, Zoroastrianism, to the dustbins of history. (As religions go, Zoroastrianism, to my tastes, was a superior religion, but . . . it still conferred the “divine rights of kings” onto their rulers, etc. There are an estimated 110,000–120,000 Zoroastrians left in the world from the millions previously.)

Back to the invasion of 500 years ago. The general, who made himself King of Persia, wasn’t converting the country to Islam, he was converting it from Sunni Islam to Shia Islam. For this many, many people died, economies were disrupted, buildings destroyed, etc. Then the people were forcefully converted from Sunni Islam to Shia Islam. Yes, that Islam, the religion of peace, whose holy book clearly states that no one is to come to Islam by force.

Never judge a religion based upon what they say, always look to what they do. Religions represent a terrible cost to human beings. Instead of focusing on things that make people’s lives better, wars are fought over imaginary differences. Religions make people stupid.

Obviously this is not the only case I base my conclusion upon. Currently Palestinians and Israelis are fighting a religious war. And the “Troubles” in Ireland are not that far in the past, the Nazi efforts to exterminate Jews and Gypsies, and then, the Croats and Serbs went at it . . . and then . . . there are myriad examples of religion being at the heart of wars and human misery.

The current actions of Christian nationalists here in the USA are part of the same picture.

Yes, I am an a-theist, and now I am an anti-religionist. If you are requesting special privileges because of your religion, I am against it. If you do not want your churches to pay taxes, I am against you.

A pox on all religions and their imaginary solaces and real damage they offer. If you are one who wants to convert the USA into a “Christian Nation,” fuck you and the horse you rode in on. You are just paving the way for turning us into an Islamic nation.