they used to castrate boys just for entertainment value. sure; they probably said it made Cthulhu happy. and in all honesty maybe it did. but that still doesnt explain why they thought chopping little boys balls off might be a fair sacrifice. a sacrifice that only the boys would suffer.
granted; we arent chopping balls off these days, much. but the same kinds of people are still around. can you guess who they are?
this is a few thoughts that I have. I try to distill a few ideas that don't seem to be properly discussed. too often a discussion gets far removed from the original purpose. also quite a bit of hyperbole will be thrown in for good measure. this be my axe to grind and I be a grind`n it.
--permission to take any of these ideas and claim them as your own is fully granted and encouraged.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Intelligent Design Designers
Intelligent Design used to be called Creationism.
they changed it because the previous named religious theme was struck down as a violation of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. so they changed the name. when other ideologies attempt to rebrand (the non-christian ones) we can easily decry that its a method of spin, propaganda, in essence: deception.
its not very christian of you to try to deceive others.
they changed it because the previous named religious theme was struck down as a violation of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. so they changed the name. when other ideologies attempt to rebrand (the non-christian ones) we can easily decry that its a method of spin, propaganda, in essence: deception.
its not very christian of you to try to deceive others.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Rant - 2012/02/08
lets get this straight.
giving time or wealth to a religion is not charity. when that religion uses that time or wealth to do good* in the world might be considered charity. but giving anything to a religion can not, in or of itself, be called charity.
* in case you were wondering: good can only be efforts that increase the true Quality of Life for the highest percentage of people for the longest period of time. anyone who thinks that means hoarding wealth for themselves is clearly not a good person.
giving time or wealth to a religion is not charity. when that religion uses that time or wealth to do good* in the world might be considered charity. but giving anything to a religion can not, in or of itself, be called charity.
* in case you were wondering: good can only be efforts that increase the true Quality of Life for the highest percentage of people for the longest period of time. anyone who thinks that means hoarding wealth for themselves is clearly not a good person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)