Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Three Things

1) Yesterday on the local news station it was announced that, according to the Vatican, it is permissible for Catholics to believe in alien life because of the vastness of the universe:

The Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, says that the vastness of the universe means it is possible there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones. In an interview published Tuesday by Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, Funes says that such a notion “doesn’t contradict our faith” because aliens would still be God’s creatures. The interview was headlined “The extraterrestrial is my brother.” Funes said that ruling out the existence of aliens would be like “putting limits” on God’s creative freedom.

I'm glad I'm no longer Catholic to endure this type of embarrassment. When the Church is not telling you how believe and how to vote (yes it does too, just in more subtle ways so as to not violate its tax-exempt status), it is giving you permissions to believe in such things! And let me just say that "putting limits" on God's creative freedom is as sinful as "putting limits" on God's love, which is what is being done when the Church teaches that God cannot (and will not) save everyone even though He wants to. RUBBISH!

2) I have a relative who owns a body shop in the town I live in. They often put little religious quips and cliches on a sign in front of this shop. Clearly fundamentalists. The one that was posted not too far back that irked my spiritual sense was this:

EXPOSURE TO THE SON MAY PREVENT BURNING.

The binary insult here is A) The strong insinuation that only those exposed to Jesus will be saved and B) The word "may"...Using this not-so-certain word makes it sound like these people are maybe not too sure about Jesus. So much for faith.

3) The third (of a million) problems I have is that many Catholics who proclaim themselves to be Pro-Life should really re-label themselves Semi-Pro-Life. You see, when one labels oneself as Pro-Life, that means ALL LIFE needs to be fought for. Not just the unborn, they have an OBLIGATION TO STAND UP FOR ALL LIFE - that being life on death row, life outside the United States, life in general. This ridiculous farce of a war we are in is what you would call NOT PRO-LIFE. So, anyone who supports the real and occurring mass deaths of innocents abroad and yet stands outside of an abortion clinic in protest is the epitome of a hypocrite. And anyone who favors capital punishment and talks about how abortion needs to be made illegal needs to take a good hard look at the backwardness of their stance. Life does not lose value outside of the womb, but it is treated this way, folks. Once you are born, look out! You could be shipped off to war or to death row...and now the same people who fought for you to be born into this world are the same ones putting ammo in your pocket and administering that lethal injection to take you out.

Sidenote: The whole abortion issue has been lumped into one great big stereotypical knot. People do not realize that many of the women who have to make that difficult decision are suffering something fierce in their hearts - and always will. They are not criminals, they are human. People are so ready to cast stones and fight for the unborn, but sure as hell do bitch up a storm when it comes to paying welfare taxes to support those children. We have to view each abortion situation and the women involved individually. True believers have to look at those women like the merciful, compassionate Lord Jesus would. I very much doubt that He would scream and spit in their faces as they enter the clinic while calling them murderers. I very much doubt that.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Signs with clever little religious quips are one of my pet peeves.
People who leave their blinker on for miles and stupid signs. Arrrgh!

Took the kids to the UU church in Joliet a few weeks ago, and the pastor (who is a female) spoke about abortion. She reviewed her position on choice, and said she's telling us where she is at, but that does not mean we have to agree. Speaking about it she says is a right of the pulpit and us agreeing or not is the right of the congregation. Too bad more religious leaders don't point out that the pulpit isn't the be all end all.

SM said...

I agree with you, Mev. If only more people would be OK with others who do not agree with them. The world would be a much better place. God forbid people be TOLERANT.

Thanks for being a reader : )

Rev. Donald Spitz said...

You believe it is ok to murder thousands of innocent children in thier mothers wombs each and you complain about a few murderers that get the death penalty, you are the HYPOCRITE.

SM said...

Thank you "Reverend" for reading my blog. While I do my best to respect your opinion, it is very strange to have someone with such an alleged title to post such an irrationally hostile response not backed up with well-thought out points and an argument structured on the ideals of God's grace. Congratulations, you took the egg-their-house-and-run approach.

Do you honestly think that those "few murderers" you so flippantly refer to in your comment were never babies, or don't have feelings or remorse or souls, too? Way to be like Christ, there, Rev. You may have missed the fact that I simply point out that anyone who calls themselves Pro-Life needs to stand up for ALL LIFE in the tradition of Christ. Is this rationale too hard to swallow, Rev. Spitz? I don't delve into the specifics of when and why I think it is ok to abort a baby - I respect babies and motherhood and life - so never make assumptions that I wish to blanket the world with thousands of anonymously-situationed abortions, sir.

And next time you comment - bring something original to the table that will foster an educated adult conversation or I won't post your comment.

God bless you, Semi-Pro-Lifer.

Cecil said...

It’s taking a Herculean effort on my part not to make fun of the name… Seriously though, you could make a comparison between innocent children and innocent adults. Since 1973 there have been 173 people that have been exonerated and released from death row. At least 39 people, innocent as you or I, have been killed for crimes they didn’t commit. That number is certainly higher that reported, but you don’t care about these people.

And if you read her post, which you probably don’t have the comprehension ability to actually do, she does not claim at all that “it is ok to murder thousands of innocent children.” While that claim itself is blatantly false, since these are not children when they are aborted anyway, they are a potential child; she actually says that, “ALL LIFE needs to be fought for. Not just the unborn.” All she says is that women who get abortions should be treated with compassion not vitriol. That’s it. But fundie fucks like you have no idea what that word even means anymore.

Religious people forget that in the bible Jesus was the prince of peace, the lord of compassion, and the evangelizer of the poor. Most fundamentalist pricks like you would rather see a poor man starve than open your wallet, wage a useless war on an idea (terrorism) and kill thousands of innocent people, and forget about compassion completely. It is your kind that has twisted the dogma of religion into something horrible. That has changed the face of God to a vengeful, petty child. That has judged everyone around you so you, in all your tiny glory, could feel superior.

Zombaggedon said...

In response to the comment of Rev. Sptiz,

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding here that I can help mediate. Your incendiary comment calling SM, the writer of this blog, a "Hypocrite" seems to me predicated on a misunderstanding of hypocrisy, the concept. Hypocrisy is typically defined as supporting, espousing, or defending two or more points on the same subject which are mutually exclusive to one another. Thus, inherent in the internal logic of any given argument, there must exist an inconsistency. No such inconsistency exists here. To wit, let us examine SM's points step by step. First, SM is taking issue with the use of the term pro-life as used culturally. Specifically, many pro-life movements have, as SM points out, too narrow a focus. Most often, pro-life movements focus only on the rights of the unborn. While there are good and rational arguments to be made regarding the aforementioned, it should also be noted that a rather larger number of people are, of course, born. SM is simply arguing that those who are born should be afforded the same protections by the pro-life movement in order for the pro-life movement to be internally consistent, or at the very least, linguistically consistent. Sadly, this is rarely the case as the pro life movement is mostly populated by hard right leaning Christian conservatives. This same political group has been a vocal proponent of our violent foreign policy across the globe and is a staunch supporter of the death penalty. This, as SM eloquently points out, is where the real inconsistency lies.
Sir, I would also take issue with your use of the word innocent. Sadly, none of us here on Earth have the same prescient powers of our great deity, and so cannot definitively make factual and infallible claims as to who is or is not innocent.
Further, While it is true that there are numerous biblical passages regarding what God finds abhorrent, it is also true that God reserves the right to judge and punish for himself. Assuming that you believe in the teachings of your professed faith, and taking a harder look at the language of your holy book, you will note that statments regarding judgment are typically old testament, but even more often are judgments for the heavenly father to make. Jesus was reasonably explicit in his comments regarding judge not lest ye be judged and the such. I believe that the implication here is that the right to judgment is reserved by God himself.
As for the rights of murderers, I would encourage you to become more familiar with the facts of the US justice system, a system which, if not routinely, at least occasionally, sentences individuals to death who are completely innocent of the crimes of which they are accused. If one were genuinely pro life, this would also be a tragedy. In fact, the pro life movement must recognize this, and the willful killing of any person as a tragedy in order not succumb to complete cognitive dissonance.
Finally, I would point out that SM's calls for compassion for women who have abortions is consistent with new testament teaching. Dying on the cross, salving the wounds and sins of all people, Christ's legacy is not for the individual to judge the sins of others, but to spread the word of reconciliation and forgiveness.
Hope this helps.

Collins said...

Wow, thanks Reverend Hippocrates, for enlightening us with your ignorance. Seriously, you just got schooled, and I think you trolled the wrong blog.

We don't need the endorsement of close-minded HYPOCRITES like yourself to live life fully, or within the love and protection of god.

Your permission, sir, is a hurdle you put up so YOU can proclaim yourself to be holier than the rest, when clearly, it was the will of Jesus for all of us to have a relationship with God, and be judged by only him.

Thanks 'Your Holiness' Spitface, but I think SM understand things a bit better than you do, despite your 'powerful position' within the 'church'.

Try a blog with stupider people next time, Jackass.

SM said...

Looks like someone has a whole Anti-Christ load of skeletons in their backwards closet. Thank you, Chuck, for sending these links as a follow up to this thread.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=72

http://www.armyofgod.com/
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0309/02/se.18.html

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/04/chesapeake-minister-man-mission

http://www.compleatheretic.com/hatemail.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Spitz

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.channel&ChannelID=137608626

Crazz said...

Everyone has pretty much said all there is to say about the topic and the giant jackass that is Rev. Spitz, so I don't really think I can add to that. I will point out though that in light of the wealth of material that is available on him, he isn't making much progress if no one who frequents this board had even heard of him. I think that speaks the loudest about him and his message of hate, intolerance, and bigotry.