Prejudiced, narrow-minded, and bigoted.

"A prejudiced, narrow minded, bigoted religion that insists it is the ONLY truth, but, you know, regrets the necessity, is still a prejudiced, narrow minded, bigoted religion, and that's exactly what I dislike about modern day conservatism, too." --Highlander, referring to Christianity in general.


Christianity is prejudiced: (most apropos definitions pasted below)
–noun
1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.

Prejudiced, might I ask, against what? Definition one is inapplicable. Knowledge, thought and reason are part and parcel of the disapproval God passed down upon sin of any kind. He has ultimate knowledge, being the Creator of this universe. Or, is it definition three that you are applying here? You don't like the unfavorable opinions that God has of certain things, so you label these opinions as prejudiced. IE, 'prejudiced' is the word you use to describe God's unfavorable opinions, because you find them unfavorable. And you know, honestly, you can't even fall on definition three, since a Christian isn't supposed to be hostile to anyone. "Love the sinner, hate the sin."

Furthermore, to be 'prejudiced', such opinions or feelings must not only be unfavorable or hostile, they must also be unreasonable. Having an unfavorable opinion of some action because your religion or belief system regards it as bad is not unreasonable. Of course, a religion or belief system that regards members of a race or nation as bad for no other reason than their membership in such groups is unreasonable, that's racism or nationalism. For religions to regard each other unfavorably is not and cannot be construed as prejudice. Differing beliefs that conflict with each other pretty much have to contest each other.

Now it's pretty clear that the 'Christians' you are talking about are hate-fed, hate-fuelled, hate-filled, prejudiced, narrow-minded, bigoted people holding signs outside gay bars that read: 'God Hates Fags', and go around 'defending life' by bombing abortion clinics. Why is it that everyone but atheists can see the scare-quotes around 'Christians' as it applies to these people?


Christianity is narrow-minded:
–adjective
2. not receptive to new ideas; having a closed mind.
3. extremely conservative and morally self-righteous.

Well, here you sort of have a case. Christians should be understandably wary of anything that conflicts with the rules God has passed down, and that would make outsiders view them as closed-minded. But there is a difference between a closed mind that rejects things without consideration, and a mind that considers them first, and rejects them based on whether or not they conflict with one's conscience. If Christians were not receptive to new ideas, the Bible would still being laboriously copied by hand by monks slowly going blind in monasteries lit by torches. Right now, the Bible is being rattled off in over 60 languages by the most advanced multi-lingual printing press in the world, located in Brooklyn, at the Watchtower Bible andTract Society. It's such a new idea it's patented.

"Extremely conservative" is only a negative connotation if you happen to be a liberal, and is a matter of taste more than anything else. The lexicographer is showing his bias here. Talk about irony. Now, 'morally self-righteous', that does describe a lot of people professing to be Christian. But look at them. Pedophile priests, womanizing televangelists, holier-than-thou bigots, do you think any of these people represent Jesus Christ? And the people that follow them, well, monkey see monkey do, eh?


Christianity is bigoted:
adjective
utterly intolerant of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

Ok. That seems like a fair cop. But given that creeds, beliefs, and opinions that vary with Jehovah's are roads to destruction (and many of them believe likewise of each other and of Christianity), you can hardly expect me to believe that in this context, 'bigoted' is at all negative. In this context, 'bigotry' is a virtue. And also... 'one's own'? As in, something some guy just decided to believe? Please. This is the singular form of belief, to which a negative word like bigotry can actually be applied.

A religion is larger than those who practice it. Bigotry is a human attribute. Belief systems are neccessarily exclusive. If you believe A, and A not B, then you cannot also believe B. 'Bigoted' cannot be applied to any religion, only to those who follow it, and only if their intolerance is based on something other than their beliefs. If all members of a religion believe 'A', and 'A' precludes 'B', you cannot call them bigoted for refusing to believe 'B'. If you can prove 'B' to be true, then feel free to beat them over the head with that.


Understand that a religion is not one man that follows it, nor is any man that follows it that religion itself. Prejudiced, Narrow-minded, and Bigoted are terms that cannot be applied to belief systems, only to individuals. You may not like a particular belief system. You may not like the people who follow it. You will encounter many belief systems that conflict with your own (and you do have one). But if you decide that all the people who follow (or profess to follow) a particular reasonable (sic) belief system are bad because they follow (or profess to follow) that belief system, see the above definitions.

Mind you, modern-day conservatism sucks.

Ah, Love!!

Below is an excerpt from an e-mail I sent to someone with relationship troubles. I happened to be going through some old e-mails, and saw it, and thought it was some pretty good writing, or something, and thought I'd share it. I have a vague, uneasy feeling that maybe I already have, perhaps on an older blog. If so, well, too bad.

So I know what I'm talking about when I say that I've been handed the short end of the stick in love. I've been crushed, I've been humiliated, I've had my heart ripped out of my chest and shoved where the sun don't shine. It's never easy, it always hurts, but it does get better. Not always fast, probably not even to 100% of what it was before, but it does get better.

Hell, my heart's been broke so many times now it's more tape and glue than original pieces. But I keep on going, because someday, I might just meet someone that will trade their taped, glued, bundle of heart-shards for mine, and we can spend of the rest of our days putting each other's hearts back together.

I know she's out there, somewhere. It's just a matter of time.

Love is giving your heart to someone, totally. Letting them into the deepest corners of your most carefully hidden heart. Giving them the keys to your happy place. You do it because you want them to always be there, and feel as welcome in your heart as you want to feel in theirs. But if they throw a big party, knock holes in the walls, and throw up in the pool and basically wreck the joint, you just have to change the locks, clean up, and start all over again. And it does get harder to give the keys to someone else, but still you do it, because one day you'll find the person willing to give you the keys to theirs, and they'll be as nervous as you are about the new plaster over the holes in their walls.

It's why we never give up. Because being let into that place, by the person you've let into yours, is the closest we'll ever get to heaven on earth. Love is the only thing worth having, and the only present worth giving. It's the only thing that can last forever that comes from another person. It's waiting for us all, if we're able to find it. So don't stop looking. It's out there somewhere. I'm sure of it.

So, yeah. Some of it may sound kind of corny, but hey, in the corn soldier army, I'm a Kernel.

Why I think Rush Limbaugh should be dropped on Michael Moore from a bomber.

First off, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX5KymB4Y_g&NR

Now this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5INPn9lCNp4&NR

Now, it was mentioned in the spots, but Fox's jerky movements were not caused by the disease itself, and exacerbated by not taking medication, but by the medication itself.

Limbaugh is one of the more wretched excuses for truly bilious vile inhuman cruelty.


Now, there's something else that was mentioned in those spots, and it hit me like a ton of lead.

MJF: (sic) "These fetal cells are coming from the leftover cells of in-vitro fertilization procedures; they're going to be destroyed anyways." (italics mine)

Up to now, I have opposed using fetal stem cells for research because I had been led to believe that these cells were coming from abortion victims (about 98% of whom I regard as murder victims, since their mothers were in no danger), or from embreyos created for the express purpose of then ghoulishly killing them and harvesting their cells.

If what he said is true, and I can't think of any good reason for it not to be true, then using these leftover cells for stem cell research is not only not morally questionable, but failing to use these cells for said reasearch is a malignant waste of life.

Let me explain (more to myself honestly):

In vitro fertilization is used when a couple can't conceive normally, but the mother can bear children. The process requires harvesting a number of sperm and egg cells from the prospective parents. The purpose of this procedure is to create life. That's important. To me. (If the procedure doesn't take place, no babies will be born at all to the couple. All of their sperm and eggs will go to waste.) The sperm and eggs are mixed, and in the process, several or maybe even all of the eggs are fertilized. The fertilized eggs are then placed in growth solutions, and one that appears hardy is selected and an implantation is attempted. The rest are frozen or otherwise stored, in case the first attempt fails. Once there is a successful outcome, the remaining embreyos are discarded.

Discarded. Thrown away. Tossed out and left to rot. Killed for no purpose. Their lives are wasted. Even though they could be used to create technology to save other lives. That is just wrong. And now there are people are coming along and saying: 'Let us use these embreyos to find cures for diseases that afflict and kill millions each year.'

Pro-lifers, brothers, fellow Christians, hear me. We have been misled. Stem cell research is not causing the deaths of the unborn, it is giving those deaths, and the short lives that preceded them, meaning. If we truly care about the unborn, then let us also care about those who will be born with genetic predispositions to diabetes, Parkinson's, ALS, Alzheimer's, and other maladies that these wasted lives could help cure.

Ask yourself this, while you're asking yourself 'Would I want to be aborted?': 'If I knew I was going to die, but I had the choice of dying to no purpose, or dying to save or improve the lives of millions, how would I choose?' We all know how Jesus chose, when faced with that question. There is no morally valid reason to oppose stem-cell research of in vitro leftovers. They are going to die regardless. Let them at least have a meaningful death.


"And the truth shall set them free"