canon jesus is way cooler than fanon jesus
canon jesus was a sassy middle eastern guy who literally said “did i fucking stutter” and hung out with prostitutes
fanon jesus is just some boring white guy who sits around hugging lambs
Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened, sources reported Thursday. The image of the Hebrew prophet Moses high-fiving Jesus Christ as both are having their erect penises vigorously masturbated by Ganesha, all while the Hindu deity anally penetrates Buddha with his fist, reportedly went online at 6:45 p.m. EDT, after which not a single bomb threat was made against the organization responsible, nor did the person who created the cartoon go home fearing for his life in any way. Though some members of the Jewish, Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist faiths were reportedly offended by the image, sources confirmed that upon seeing it, they simply shook their heads, rolled their eyes, and continued on with their day.
Reblogged with text only just in case the image of a cartoon elephant god with pendulous breasts, an erect penis, and a vagina engaging in sex acts with other imaginary theological constructs on a heavenly bed of clouds is somehow offensive to anyone who still follows me.
But in all seriousness, I am increasingly sick of acting like there’s not a fundamental difference between the way Islam’s most fervent followers behave and the way the most fervent followers of every other religion behave. I don’t know exactly what the reason is, and I’m not maligning the peaceful followers of Islam, but there’s something horrifyingly fanatical about believing that it’s okay to kill people who portray something you care about negatively.
I hope it goes without saying that I think creating a film deliberately intended to antagonise a significant percentage of the world’s population is incredibly reprehensible behaviour, and I think the people behind this particular film deserve some serious verbal chastisement. But I refuse to accept the idea that creating a work of art, however ill-founded, ill-intentioned, and false-hearted, is in any way similar to the decision to murder people who have done you no physical harm in cold blood.
Children are not the future of the church. Don’t ever say this, especially not in their presence. It is demeaning, condescending, and offensive. Even more so if you say this to or of our youth.
Children are the now of the church, full members and partners in the ministry of the church.
Alternatively—and this is just a thought, you understand, totally off the top of my head—we could avoid indoctrinating children with religion, and let them come to it on their own later if it still makes sense to them once they understand how the world works.
It never ceases to bother me that religious indoctrination of children is a major cause of ongoing violence worldwide.
Declaring that “life must always be protected”, a senior Vatican cleric has defended the Catholic Church’s decision to excommunicate the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old rape victim who had a life-saving abortion in Brazil.
Cardinal Giovanni Batista Re, who heads the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, told reporters that although the girl fell pregnant after apparently being abused by her stepfather, her twins had, “the right to live, and could not be eliminated”.
In an interview with the Italian newspaper, La Stampa, the cardinal added: “It is a sad case but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons. Life must always be protected.”
Police believe the girl was sexually assaulted for years by her stepfather, possibly since she was six. That she was four months pregnant with twins emerged only after she was taken to hospital complaining of severe stomach pains.
The controversy represents a PR nightmare for the Vatican. The unnamed girl’s mother and doctors were excommunicated for agreeing to Wednesday’s emergency abortion yet the Church has not taken formal steps against the stepfather, who is in custody. Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, the conservative regional archbishop for Pernambuco where the girl was rushed to hospital, has said that the man would not be thrown out of the Church, because although he had allegedly committed “a heinous crime”, the Church took the view that “the abortion, the elimination of an innocent life, was more serious”.
Let’s parse that again: the Catholic Church thinks it’s more heinous for a young woman to have a life-saving medical procedure than for a stepfather to repeatedly rape a girl for three years.
Your tithe dollars at work.
If this doesn’t make you wonder why the Catholic Church continues to exist, we are probably not friends.
— Diderot, via Futility Closet
The Reason Rally is a demonstration that is taking place at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. on March 24, 2012. The rally is being sponsored by major secular organizations of the United States. It has been described as an “atheist Woodstock.”
Speakers scheduled to attend include biologist Richard Dawkins, musician Tim Minchin, Mythbuster’s co-host Adam Savage, actor-comedian Eddie Izzard, Rep. Pete Stark, Sen. Tom Harkin, Paul Provenza, PZ Myers, Dan Barker, among others. The rock band Bad Religion is scheduled to perform at the rally.
This is a thing that’s happening today. Somehow, it doesn’t seem to be receiving a whole lot of coverage in the news.
I am inclined to make a couple small edits and adopt this as my credo:
Know more today about the world than you knew yesterday. Lessen suffering.
The goal should be to lessen the suffering of others, but sometimes it is necessary to lessen one’s own suffering first.
The case against burning wood is every bit as clear as the case against smoking cigarettes. Indeed, it is even clearer, because when you light a fire, you needlessly poison the air that everyone around you for miles must breathe. Even if you reject every intrusion of the “nanny state,” you should agree that the recreational burning of wood is unethical and should be illegal, especially in urban areas. By lighting a fire, you are creating pollution that you cannot dispose. It might be the clearest day of the year, but burn a sufficient quantity of wood and the air in the vicinity of your home will resemble a bad day in Beijing. Your neighbors should not have to pay the cost of this archaic behavior of yours. And there is no way they can transfer this cost to you in a way that would preserve their interests. Therefore, even libertarians should be willing to pass a law prohibiting the recreational burning of wood in favor of cleaner alternatives (like gas).
I have discovered that when I make this case, even to highly intelligent and health-conscious men and women, a psychological truth quickly becomes as visible as a pair of clenched fists: They do not want to believe any of it. Most people I meet want to live in a world in which wood smoke is harmless. Indeed, they seem committed to living in such a world, regardless of the facts. To try to convince them that burning wood is harmful—and has always been so—is somehow offensive. The ritual of burning wood is simply too comforting and too familiar to be reconsidered, its consolation so ancient and ubiquitous that it has to be benign. The alternative—burning gas over fake logs—seems a sacrilege.
And yet, the reality of our situation is scientifically unambiguous: If you care about your family’s health and that of your neighbors, the sight of a glowing hearth should be about as comforting as the sight of a diesel engine idling in your living room. It is time to break the spell and burn gas—or burn nothing at all.
Of course, if you are anything like my friends, you will refuse to believe this. And that should give you some sense of what we are up against whenever we confront religion.
I can say truthfully that I’m aware of the health issues surrounding the burning of wood, as well as sustainability issues that Sam Harris doesn’t even begin to mention.
To me, the smell of woodsmoke is one of the most comforting and relaxing scents I know. The very act of sitting around a fire with several close friends or family members has a talismanic effect, providing me with a feeling of safety and general well-being—however false that feeling may be. My personal suspicion is that this positive feeling about sitting around a fire with fellow humans was evolutionarily advantageous, and the early humans who didn’t have this reaction wound up—quite literally—out in the cold, and had few children. Regardless of the ultimate reason, this is certainly a hard feeling to shake.
This is an enlightening experience for me. While enjoying things that are bad for me personally is nothing new—desserts are my favourite vice—I have until now avoided knowingly partaking in behaviours that are dangerous to my fellow humans. And yet it’s truly difficult for me to imagine totally giving up the experience of sitting around a fire a few times a year.