Despite almost constant harassment from �straight� church-goers who continuously call down the sulfurous wrath of their god on infidels engaged in same-gender sex and co-habitation, more homosexuals are having marriage or �union� ceremonies in churches and synagogues to �make god a part of their relationship.�

Although 37 states have passed laws banning same-sex marriages, members of the clergy say they are seeing a growing number of religiously observant gay couples who are sidestepping the debate over legal rights and seeking to consecrate their unions in churches and synagogues.

�Yeah, I get about 10 requests a week to officiate at a gay marriage,� admitted Father Canon James Newman of St. Bede’s Episcopal Church in Los Angeles. �So we hook them up. It�s no big deal, really. Sure god will punish them for all eternity in a fiery lake of burning brimstone for playing on the wrong team, but in the mean time, I don�t see any reason to deny them the opportunity to pay us a huge fee for officiating over their union ceremony.�

Christian churches that permit gay blessing ceremonies, though sometimes with limitations, are the Unitarian Universalists, Disciples of Christ, United Church of Christ and the Metropolitan Community Churches. Among the Jewish branches, Reform and Reconstructionist rabbis have permission.

The remainder of churches in the United States have said �Not just no, but aitch-eee-double-hockey-sticks no!�

When asked to comment, most ultra-conservative Christians just gibbered and slobbered in fits of religious rage.

Yep, folks, some more (botched?) exorcisms and dead kids: Girl, 6, Found Dead in Motel

The child was found Monday in a room at the Savannah Suites, an extended-stay motel in downtown Atlanta. She had been strangled and stabbed, and her back was broken, police said.

“She had numerous broken bones and compound fractures,” said Atlanta police public information officer John Quigley.

Looks like we’re gaining on Satan. I think we got him on the run.

Not that anyone needs reminding or anything, but it’s nice to see how loving God actually is — you know, after he gets rid of the elderly and kids: Winter Storms Blamed for 44 Deaths

The weather was blamed for six deaths each in North Carolina and South Carolina; five each in Iowa and Missouri; four in Ohio; three each in Nebraska and Minnesota; two each in Indiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Oklahoma; and one each in Kansas and West Virginia. Most of the deaths were in traffic accidents.

Just a couple of things on this. First, it’s really nice to have the NWS to tell us what’s coming (unlike the old days), and second, all of the deaths are our fault, since we shouldn’t have gotten behind the wheel in the first place. So, they all got what they deserved: death.

Stay warm, all you folks up north. And remember: Smile! God loves you!

Ranting about the moral teachings of Xianty that the religious right like to focus on (and those they like to ignore) put me in mind of a well-known (but perhaps not widely believed?) passage from Mark 10:18-30, dealing with rich bastards, camels, and eyes of needles:

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions. And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee. And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel’s, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

One wonders if the Bible read by W the Burning Shrub and his scripture group has this passage blackened out? I mean, this passage is really the double-whammy: As an atheist, the idea that you should give up the goods of this world in order to be repaid a hundredfold in the afterlife is the epitome of stupid religious nihilism about the real life we do have in favor of the illusory eternal life we don’t. But there it is, clear as day, in the words of the “Jesus” character. Way clearer than those Old Testament warnings about seed spilling, if you ask me. But somehow, this is where the selective hypocritical blindness to the teachings of the J-man settles in for our ‘publican Xian assholes. Stupidity and sheer hypocrisy, all wrapped in one.

For more (and way funnier) commentary on this passage, you really should read Al Franken’s excellent “Supply Side Jesus” comic (from his Lies & Lying Liars book; the comic is graciously distributed freely on the net, now.) Go read it.movies licker assbbw post moviebdsm cane movies freemovie bdsmmovies beastilitymovies 1999 of bestporn reviews movies bestbestiality movies forum Map

I mostly kind of like Ellen Goodman for her warm and soft liberalism. And her Preaching in politics op-ed seemed mostly on the mark, but still managed to leave me a tiny bit uneasy. Mostly, it’s a fine if predictable bit about how right-wing Amerikkka has co-opted the language of religion and the moral force it has for many, in contrast to the kind of use religious motivations were put to by, say, M. L. King. I’m fine with that; obviously, those motivations ain’t nothin to me; but I think lefties who do believe can and should legitimately remind the right that the left’s moral callings to help the less fortunate and discourage the call to greed are probably far more in touch with the explicit morality of actual Xianity (as espoused by, say, the Pope, or the Bible’s “Jesus” character) than the right’s social-darwinistic pro-greed moral priggishness.

But she seems to bemoan “the difficulty the left has in linking religion, morality, and politics”, quoting Jim Wallis of Call to Renewal who says, “If the Republicans are too controlled by religious fundamentalists, Democrats are too controlled by secular fundamentalists”, and George Lakoff (yeah, the linguist) as saying liberals tongue-tied on morality: “If you ask most liberals, `What do you believe about morality?’ they don’t know what to say.” Both of those claims are pretty much obvious bullshit, but she quotes them positively. And then she gives us the backhanded

I confess that I too am uncomfortable with political preachers. The sounds of religion ring warily in ears accustomed to hearing them from the far right. At the same time, I want to know that the man in the White House has a coherent moral framework that guides him and guides us.

Fine; me too. But she’s shading a little close to “and that means linking it with God”, even though she does acknowledge that “A president doesn’t have to be religious to be moral. You don’t need to be godly to be good.” Let’s talk about our moral obligation to fairness, to help the less fortunate, and to encourage charity and tolerance rather than greed and tight-assed righteousness. But leave it us to decide whether the moral ground for that lies in moral reason or our all being God’s chillin’.

Brent at Unscrewing the Inscrutible has a nice bit on how W’s “faith-based” team lets their anti-anything-but-Xian view spill out no matter how hard they try not to. Check in out at Theocracy Watch over there. (OK, it doesn’t hurt that he said nice things about my “public square” rant in his Code Phrase Christians entry.)

Christianity Today actually has a decent little roundup of some of the recent Deanism about religion, including both his “no” answer to “Do you ever think ‘what would Jesus do?’” and his comment about his backing of gay civil unions as supported by his religious faith. Check it out at Dean Changes Tack on Religion Comments.free movies pornolesbian movie clipsmovies porno freemovies teeniefree movies fuckingmovies mike apartmentmovie pornsex movie clips horse Map

Last week, I posted an entry entitled “Britney Spears and Howard Dean linked?”. It was a little comment on an op-ed by Andy Rooney in which he — after some joking about whether he should write about Britney’s Spears’ much-publicized Vegas “wedding” event — turned to the “heavy” issue of Dean’s favorite philosopher (Hume) and whether Dean might be a closet atheist.

That day, our number of visitors and hits both doubled; within 2 days, they were back to the usual levels. High levels of interest in Dean’s religious views, or Hume’s empiricism? Perhaps. Or, just maybe, mentioning Britney Spears might have something to do with it.

Now, I personally don’t care much one way or the other about Britney Spears — although, to the extent that I have an opinion, I’m inclined to think she’s a talentless semi-retarded bimbo who rode to fame and fortune by exploiting the sexual fantasies of 40-year-old guys with lolita issues and the tween girls they secretly desire. (And I say that without malice; some of my best friends are 40-year-old guys with lolita issues.) But that’s a rant for another time. What’s interesting is the (reasonably inferred, though hardly guaranteed) observation that the mere mention of Britney Spears can light such a little fire here in our little backwater of atheistic commentary.

What’s going on here? We turn to the Good Book for guidance. In a well known (thank you, Jimmy Carter) passage from Matthew 5:27-28, Jesus reminds us that

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Couple this with the somewhat less well-known passage at Revelation, 17:1-6

And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

Need I say more?

OK, one more thing: If my theory of the visits/hits increase is right, I should probably get an even bigger bump if I were to say things like “View the Britney Spears wedding night porn video here!” or “See Britney Spears in hot all-girl action!” or “Watch Britney Spears have sex with animals!” or something like that. But of course, that would be wrong: I have no reason whatsoever to think there is any Britney Spears wedding night porn video, or that Britney Spears has sex with animals, or that Britney Spears has hot all-girl action, and it would be completely wrong for me to imply in any way there are videos available here or anywhere else that would show Britney Spears having sex with anybody or anything. So if you’re here looking for Britney Spears sex videos, you’re out of luck. We don’t have any Britney Spears sex videos, and we don’t know anybody who does have Britney Spears sex videos.

Of course, if you came here “accidentally”, please feel free to stay for atheistic commentary and general God-bashing.