Friday, March 19, 2010
On March 10, 2010 Rev. Gabriele Amorth, the chief exorcist of the Vatican (this is a full time job?!?), said "the Devil is at work inside the Vatican," and that "when one speaks of ‘the smoke of Satan’ in the holy rooms, it is all true—including these latest stories of violence and pedophilia."
So the good news is that they are officially admitting that something sinister, and by their definition evil, is going on in the Vatican.
The bad news is that something sinister and, by their definition evil, is going on in the Vatican.
From the popes brother slapping around choir boys to the papal aide's prostitution ring, to the excommunication of the families of little girls for consenting to life saving surgery (and the retention of the vile rapist who made that surgery necessary), to the continual allegations of sexual abuse by church officials, to the lies and condemnation of condoms and birth control that the church offers as truth to countries dying at alarming rates from AIDS, the Papal city has been a conflagration of evil for years now.
The worst thing is that the Pope, the catholic churches moral and spiritual guide, is himself at the centre of it all, and has provided a framework and a safe haven within which these predators can operate.
The Vatican is looking more and more like the very model of an tyrannical oligarchy. A group of elites who demand dogmatic morality as their set of rule, but see themselves as above judgment BY that moral code. Trust is their currency, but secrecy is their economy and the price WE pay is the welfare of our children.
In a document drafted by the now Pope (called the Crimen Sollicitationis)and sent to all of the bishops during Ratzingers appointment as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (the Vatican office responsible for investigating abuse claims) he delineated very clearly the Vatican's policy on what to do if claims of sexual abuse arise.
Cover it up.
That's right. The man who was the head of the department for investigating claims of sexual abuse, outlined a policy of silence for incidents of child rape. Children under the care of men whom society is supposed to trust were entrusted to those who had been given the papal green light to rape and abuse them with no real consequence. Not only was the order for secrecy given, but a statute of limitations was placed on that particular obstruction of justice.
"Until the age of 18, then 10 more years"
What was the penalty for disobedience if one moral priest took a stand?
The rules were outlined with the explicit instruction that it was "under pain of excommunication" to defy his edict.
Does that place the blame on the Pope for the rape, pain and suffering of those innocents? I say that it does. While he didn't pull the trigger (or the zipper), he DID create a culture of secrecy around this terrible crime. He created a framework in which the rapists KNEW that they would likely not be held accountable, and face little more than embarrassment from their superiors.
He became the head of an effort to suppress any "embarrassing story", and created the priestly shuffle as the solution and the punishment.
Enraged yet? You should be.
If not, then lets talk about something more personal than just setting out immoral rules of conduct.
How about the case of an 11-year-old German boy identified as Wilfried F.? He was taken on a vacation trip to the mountains by a priest. After that, he was given alcohol, locked in a bedroom, stripped, and forced to give the priest oral sex.
That priest was transferred from Essen to Munich for ‘therapy’ by then-Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger, with assurances that he would no longer have children in his care. Very shortly after this, Vicar General Gerhard Gruber who was Ratzinger’s deputy, returned him to ‘pastoral’ work, where he carried on his career of rape and abuse.
THERAPY?? How dare he decide what the penalty should be? How dare he fire and forget at this problem. He moved the offender, and hoped for the best. Hoped at the cost of children's safety.
This is only ONE telling of many stories like this.
But if this crime isn't enough to condemn this cowardly bastard of a man, we can look at some of his other indiscretions.
This isn't his only crime, although it would be enough for me to see a desire for his arrest and jailing.
He has repeatedly lied about the situation of AIDS in Africa, saying that condoms make the AIDS problem worse, and preaching that they are against the faith to those who are suffering. This contributes to an epidemic spread of the disease that kills millions a year.
Not enough? How about his unreasoning hatred for gays?
He has publicly stated that gay marriage is a threat to all of creation and is reason for concerns about our environment. Even going so far as to say that "saving mankind from homosexuality" is as important as saving the rain-forests.
This kind of statement would be branded hate speech if his white robe was to extend in a pointed hat covering all but his eyes. The only thing that is missing is the burning cross. How does he get away with it? How do we let him?
He has lit the fires of hatred under a witch hunt for gays in the priesthood. Rooting them out whenever he can. In the seminary, candidates must undergo a psychological screening to ensure that they lust for the right gender. He has even gone so far as to call it an "objective disorder"
Does it seem strange that he is rooting out the homosexuals with such verve, but is completely unconcerned with identifying pedophiles with the same panicked effort?
It does if you live as the highest official to an organization whose skewed moral compass leads a faith based group that believes his authority comes from God himself.
He has repeatedly placed children in danger, by shuffling pedophiles to new places for them to hunt for the prey.
Prey in the form of our children.
We may not be able to stop the pedophiles before they act, but we can speak out against the monster who allows it.
We can make the pedophiles pay for what they have done, instead of merely having to move.
This is a message to Catholics;
I know that you have your faith, and I am not using this space to argue its merits.
I know that you believe that faith comes at a price, even the bible says that it will.
But I also know that you love your children.
There are parameters for every belief, for every dogma, for every set of morals, outside which we simply can't live.
A border that just can't be crossed.
Are you willing to set that border to such a distance that it will encompass sacrificing the safety of your children?
Are you willing to send them to a place that has a directive from its senior member to ENSURE that abuses of your children will be ignored and kept secret?
My hope is that, no matter how strong your faith, that the cost of your faith, does not include your children's well-being and safety.
My mother once told me;
"When a person shows you who they are" (as the pope has shown us for years)
He has shown himself to be a hateful, immoral, unreasoning, monster in the past.
You know what?
I believe him.
The devil IS at work in the Vatican, and his name is Joseph Alois Ratzinger.
Rev Ratzinger slaps children in choir
Papal Prostition ring
GIrls family ecommunicated for 9 year olds life saving abortion
Rapist step fathers crime "not serious enough" http://bit.ly/9SPyTd
Pope lies and says that Condoms make AIDS problem worse
Saving mankind from gays more important than preserving rain-forest.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Ninjas have been around for thousands of years, and during that time they have garnered much respect as stealthy fighting legends. During the shadow warrior’s 2500 year reign, no single group has ever made a serious push to generate the fear and respect that Ninjas enjoy.
Their number one spot on the terror list has long belonged to shinobi, and it has been largely unchallenged, until now.
Who could challenge the ninja? The legendary dark warrior? The silent assassin?
Who could supplant them as the leaders in terror and fighting skill?
Shaolin monks? A
re these sequestered peaceniks coming out of hiding to bend spear tips on their chests in public and demand our obedience? Will they do finger-stands and amaze us into fearing them? Will their bald heads shining light on us inspire terror? No, likely not. The skill is clearly there, but the will to bring fear to the masses is not. The mystery surrounds them, but they bump their knees on furniture in the dark.
Besides, can you really fear vegetarians?
Republicans? I mean intelligent people all over the world fear them now. Bush made sure of that and Palin and the tea party have entrenched that fear in the fabric of the culture that we live in. But can they really challenge ninjas?
No, I would say not. They are not easily disarmed and are extremely tenacious but they are not well armed and republicans make fools of themselves without any outside influence.
Ninjas don't like being laughed at.
As a matter of fact, mocking only moves at 4 times the speed of the internet, and ninjas are already in your kitchen making sandwiches and looking at your family albums while they wait for you to come home in that time. They are killing you for mocking them before the thought has fully formed in your head.
So I don't think republicans are a good competitor here.
No, the new villain that I am speaking of are learning their skills in new fighting schools that cater to their special killing needs. These are Muslim women who, while wearing the niqab, are studying martial arts in Britain. Dozens of new schools are appearing every day to teach them the fighting arts. They say they are protecting themselves against a new anti Islam violence, I say that is a convenient excuse to get out the niqab and inspire fear.
I call them ninjabis.(pronounced ninj-abies)
Think about it. They are already shrouded in mystery, they can blend into the darkness and they are backed by the fear that extremist Islam has created all over the world and their holy book contains more instruction of who to kill and when than any other tome.
For years Islamic men have been spreading their terrible beliefs and bringing terror (whether it is warranted or not), now they are in a perfect position to join the ranks of the silent killers.
They are used to not making eye contact, to staying in the background and trying to stay unnoticed, to concealing their identities as individuals, and they are perfectly suited to night operations. Who better to undermine the reputation that ninjas have tried so hard to develop?
They say that the meek shall inherit the earth, maybe they will do that inheriting by ninjabi chopping and head kicking!
The ninja only have one natural enemy, Samurai. Since Samurai have been disarmed as of the late 1800's with the no weapons edict, ninjas rarely come up against any real competition. But now that the ninjabi are around, that might change.
Every creature has a natural enemy, so who can stand this terrible new threat?
Who can defang the dogmatic snake?
Who will emerge as the natural enemy to these dangerous ninjabis?
Who could possibly defeat such a being?
A being whose only weaknesses and natural enemies are their husbands, the Quran, Allah, stonings, sexual guilt, genital mutilations, and simple lustful glances cursing them for someone else's thoughts.
Hmmmm maybe the ninjas are safe after all.....
Monday, March 15, 2010
How would YOU design creation?
Would you hide yourself?
Would you make your words open to abuse and interpretation?
Would you include terrible stories to be told in your name?
Would you make creatures whose very existence is to make another being suffer?
Would you make the reproductive act so very enjoyable and then cover it with guilt and have it end in the most painful of experiences?
Would you create beings who would fight each other and kill each other for petty reasons?
And would you be so insecure a supreme being as to care so deeply about being loved by them that you would torture them forever if they decided not to like you, or even believe you existed?
Or would you do something different?
I would give my creations a stable world to live in, one without unpredictable volcanoes and fault lines, without destructive weather patterns, and without conditions that were so harsh that they can and would kill those left in them. I just wouldn't THINK of making my creations world a harsh and inhospitable environment. Seems mean.
I would give them the ability to see me, and know that I was real, or to hide myself so completely that they wouldn't know I was there at all. This seems to be the way to keep them from dividing themselves along the lines of misunderstanding about me.
I would design bodies that were more efficient. Eyes that saw with no blind spot. Knees that were meant to withstand the rigors of being upright. A spine that was more curved so as to absorb shock more fully. I would not invent disease in the first place. To design a body that inherently causes pain in those who inhabit them seems malicious.
I would give them the gift of free thought, and then not punish them for using it. I would merely reveal to them, while they were living, why it might not be the best choice, and how it affects others. To give anything but the best mentoring to those in your charge seems irresponsible.
I would love them all equally, and ensure that wars and hatred didn't exist in my name. When people were in need, I would speak to them, and tell them that it will be ok. I mean appear individually and talk. Not just send a "feeling" of not being alone. I real tangible talk. Something that would assist in the healing process and not just drive a person to deeper delusion.
I would honour evidence and a robust standard of science. This would be the highest use of the free will and intellect that I could imagine, and I would honour those people who helped their race by discovering new and fascinating ways to interact with reality as saints. For it would be them who truly appreciated what I had given them.
I would ensure that women enjoyed guilt free sex, and understood that sex has no moral component. It would be my gift to them, and a gift that is to be enjoyed equally by men and women.
I would not enjoy seeing people on their knees nearly as much as I would enjoy seeing them on their feet, laughing, jumping, kissing, laughing, and singing.
That would be the whole point of MY creation, so see them loving and living as though it was a gift, and not one to be wasted in servitude but to be spent in the rapture of joy before coming to my house to watch the joy of all those who come after.
In short, my creation would make sense, make love, respect science, love life and live in the light of love of one another.
Doesn't that sound better?
What would YOU do?
Sunday, March 7, 2010
If the universe is less than 10,000 years old, then;
all that we know about geology and biology is wrong;
the speed of light has been wrongly calculated which means;
Einsteinian physics is wrong and;
the distance and speed of other galaxies has been wrongly calculated,which means that all we know about astronomy is wrong which means that;
Newtonian physics is also wrong.
"For ...informed people to challenge accepted scientific orthodoxy on the basis of proper evidence is always healthy, but to debunk the whole of science on the back of a story passed down by some Iron Age goat-herders is just self-delusion" -Niel Butcher
There is just too much evidence against the universe being only 10000 years old or less. This is not belief, it is purposeful delusion to espouse this as a belief.
It is true...FACT...not up for debate....
It is one thing to argue about things that can't be proven or falsified in the name of your "beliefs", it is quite another to ignorantly tread into the realm of what we know to be fact and yell at the top of your lungs "LIAR!".
We may not be able to tell you with certainty that there is no god, but there are a few things that we CAN say for certain.
The flood didn't happen;
Evolution is true and;
The earth isn't less than 10,000 years old.
To all those who still believe this (to the harm and detriment of you and your children) I will dare to tread into the metaphysical realm where beliefs are not required to be supported by evidence and yell at the top of MY lungs......
READ A BOOK!!!!
Friday, March 5, 2010
Beliefs are not due any respect.
Would you respect my belief if I said that the moon was made of green cheese or would you call it silly even though you respected me?
Would you respect my belief if I said that I believed that goblins made my garden grow or would you think me a bit off for putting out a bucket of cheese for them every night?
Would you respect my belief if I thanked the devil for all that we know because I thought he had been given a bad rap for all his supposed wrongdoings?
What if I said that I believed that the holocaust never happened and that I thought it was propaganda?
Would you respect that?
Nor should you.
They are ridiculous things to say.
That is my whole point, beliefs are not due any respect merely because we espouse them as beliefs.
They are only due respect if we can show that they are true, or that they have useful relevance to reality.
What is ridiculous are people who expect "respect" for unfounded and bizarre claims about reality when they go against everything that we know to be true.
What is ridiculous are people who hide behind the statement "it is what I believe" with the full expectation of it not to be questioned merely because it is a belief.
What is ridiculous are people who hold beliefs which are hateful, harmful and interfering under the guise of morality merely because they are religious.
Beliefs inform actions, and actions must be justifiable.
So far, religious beliefs are not,
and that is why I don't respect them.