Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Preaching Abortion - The Pope Does It Best!

If you believe that a human fetus is alive, congratulations. You are correct. There is a heart beat, respiration, and all of the other stuff that goes with life.
If you believe that a fetus in a human womb is human, again congratulations. Of course, what else could it be? Mouse? Monkey? Bacterium?
If you link these two and conclude that all abortion is the taking of a human life and must be stopped, you are going a bit farther with the conclusions than may be warranted.
The time that the life become the kind of human life that is worth protecting becomes an important point. Is every sperm and every egg to be encouraged to create a human being?
If you are Catholic, that is what they teach. They then tell their priests not to use their sperm to reproduce and they tell their nuns not to use their eggs to reproduce.
Why the double standard?
Clearly, the nuns and priests are defective people and should not be allowed to continue their genetic lineage - didn't God create Darwin and allow him to recognize the little bit of amusement that God came up with to while away the millennia? Evolution.
The idea that men should not have sex, but spend a lot of time with impressionable young boys is clearly extreme hubris or the work of someone with the ability to provide incredible self control to all of his minions.
A perfect being could do this.
The results of the exercise of the Supreme Being's perfection suggests that He defines perfection differently from the rest of us. Of course, since He is a supreme being He is capable of changing whatever rules He feels like changing, including definitions. The fundamentalists do not seem to understand this.
Sorry, I used fundamentalist and understand in the same sentence. That is absolutely wrong.
If a supreme being is incapable of using a metaphor, what underachiever would really want to believe in Him, anyway?
Anyway, the Pope is here to encourage abortion and altar boy rape. Maybe we should ask him why his religion doesn't offer 72 virgins or some other afterlife extravalue coupon program to those who kill for their God.
It's only a matter of time.
The fundamentalists have a great sales pitch "Eternal Orgasm or Unrelenting Torture?" - as long as you don't read the fine print.
Who am I kidding, they don't need to hide it in fine print - as long as you don't read.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

The Threat to Science of Women - Not Religion

Oops. I forgot to include that I was directed to this lovely article by the denialism blog. The post is dated March 11. I apologize for not mentioning that originally. Thank you for bringing this scribbling to my attention.

Vox Day writes that religion is not a threat to science, but women are. It is amusing, but I felt that he must be looking in a mirror to come up with his examples of abuse of science.

He states that:

women already earn 57 percent of bachelor's degrees, 59 percent of master's degrees and a majority of doctorates.

The idea of biology classes being taught by lesbian professors who believe that heterosexual procreation is a myth or calculus courses being taught by women who can't do long division may sound impossible today, but tell that to any software developer, and he'll be able to provide you with plenty of current examples of computer science engineers, some with advanced CS degrees, who have no idea how to even begin writing a computer program.

Apparently, the ability of women to outperform men in school is the reason they are a danger. Suddenly, there will be a Jeckyl/Hyde transformation and they will have forgotten basic math or will be obsessed with radical feminism. Either would be a serious problem, but where does he get these ideas?

There is radical liberal thought on campuses and probably always will be.

Still, he and his jihadist friends seem to desire to bundle all of the women up in burkhas and cleanse the schools of their evil influence. Or are they just anti-American and incapable of a little competition with women? According to his own numbers, women seem to be more suited to higher education. He just doesn't seem to be able to grow a set and compete in the same class room.

Why this hatred of women?

If women are evil, gays are evil, masturbation is evil, and surgical manipulation of sexual organs to avoid reproduction is evil - is there anything left for him to do? Insane posting, maybe.

Of course, he would write the same about me as far as insanity is concerned, but I can stand the competition. :-)

Did he steal a Taliban edition of the Koran with all of the fanatical stuff highlighted and set about translating it to Aramaic, so he could fit in with all of the rest of the pseudo-Christian He-Man Women Haters Club?

Later he adds:

Because they are the intellectual driving force of humanity, men will be fine.

It is written that "women ruin everything"; having destroyed the liberal arts, the classics and the pseudo-sciences, it is now abundantly clear that the more rigorous sciences are next on the equalitarians' destructive agenda.

I am relieved to know that "men will be fine." I have had my moments when I was less than happy with a woman, or even more than one woman, but to claim that "'women ruin everything'" is not something you expect to hear from someone who is sober and has left adolescence behind.

His argument is not persuasive on a logical level. Some women are radical feminists, women are passing men in academic achievements, so radical feminists will take over and ruin science!

Universities have a huge problem with censorship of any unpleasant thought, such as the idea that personal responsibility is a good thing. This is something that should be opposed by conservatives and liberals. The "liberal amendment" in the Bill of Rights is the first one. Without this, often unpleasant, freedom of speech we cease to be the America that is worth defending.

He claims to be a libertarian, but how does one justify excluding women from education and still claim that he is promoting freedom and eliminating government interference in private lives?

The highlighted and underlined words, in the quotes, linked to what appeared to be advertisements, so I disabled them. I never clicked through on them, but different windows popped up with what appeared to be advertisements, if the mouse hovered near these words.

Sally Kern you inspire me!

Sally Kern is inspiring.

Inspiring me to write, at least.

She almost makes you wish for a logic requirement for legislators, but then they might actually accomplish something other than obsessing about everyone else's sexual behavior. There is probably a DSM IV category for neurotics like this, but they are so busy calling others deviant. Any "others" why limit that to gays, she probably doesn't.

If the mainstream is like her, then everyone else is deviant (even gays). If she is a reflection of the mainstream then being deviant is the only ethical position.

She probably obsesses on sexual positions, too.