Archive for Funny

Atheist donor is Olbermann’s worst person for June 29

30 June 2009

As the Friendly Atheist wonders, did Keith Olbermann not stop to consider the reasons why the atheist donor didn’t want his identity known concerning his large contribution? Maybe that information would have taken the focus away from the message of the bus campaign and the media would have focused on the “evil donor”. Or maybe that person wanted to contribute to the campaign and didn’t want to “come out” in such a large way for whatever personal reasons he or she might have. Olbermann must not have taken the time to think before making his hasty decision to publicly condemn the person for their “hypocrisy.”

I would not consider anyone who donates money to a good cause to qualify for the “worst person” list. As one YouTube commenter stated “Personally, I think the person who gave the generous amount of 10,000 should be appreciated for their generosity. . .”

So, what’s up Keith??? Why the snark?

Here’s the clip:

There are many reasons why the atheist would want to remain anonymous in regards to his/her donation. Hemant Mehta quotes Greta Christina:

There are some realities about living as an atheist that you may not know about, Mr. Olbermann. Coming out as an atheist can have serious real-world consequences. Parents get denied custody of their children for being atheists. People get harassed and vandalized by their neighbors for being atheists. Teachers get suspended for being atheists. Teenagers get harassed and suspended from school for being atheists. Politicians whip up anti-atheist fear to try to get elected. (And that’s just in the US. I’m not even talking about parts of the world where atheism is a crime, punishable by imprisonment or death.)

One can encourage others to “come out” even if it isn’t the right time or place for you to. We all have to do it in our own way, in our own time. Some just come out with it, for others it is a gradual and careful process.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Allegories Gone Wild – Abducted By An Angel? Say What?

21 June 2009

Nephelim photo

1 Enoch 39:1–And it shall come to pass in those days that the elect and holy children will descend from the high heavens, and their seed will become one with the children of men.

Let it be said – I rather enjoy trolling the deep, sometimes stagnant waters of the Internet. Because regardless of what you’re looking for, you’ll stumble upon some truly mind-boggling material. In this episode, I discovered a truly strange and difficult (to read) site that tries to amalgamate modern technology with ancient Hebraic text.

"At that time I beheld the Ancient of Days, while he sat upon the throne of his glory, while the book of the living
was opened in his presence, and while all the powers which were above the heavens stood around and before him." Book of Enoch 47:3 (Ethiopic, Artisan pub)

Since it’s English translation in the 1800’s from texts found in Ethiopia in 1768, The Book of Enoch (known today as 1st Enoch) has made quite a stir in academic circles. 1 Enoch has been authenticated as existing and in wide use before the church age (most scholars now date it at 200 BC). Multiple copies were discovered in 1948 in the Dead Sea Scrolls. This of course has caused many to wonder why it is not included in modern Bibles…

Because it’s considered Pseudepigrapha, which translated for the layman means: “are falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded; a work, simply, "whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past.” (Of course, this covers a huge percentile of the wholly bibble as we know it anyways, but when the crazies exclude crazy work, well, that says something about the work in question, does it not?)

Particular to this site, parts of The Book of Enoch tell the story of wicked angels who abducted and mated with human women, resulting in the hybrid race known throughout secular and Biblical history as the Nephilim (giants, KJV).

Ah…secular history? Umm…no proof that they ever existed? Hello?

While this account encompasses only the first four verses of Genesis 6 (but see also Genesis 3:15, 2 Peter 2:4-6, Jude 6-7), Enoch 1 relates this story in great detail. It lists the names of 18 "prefect" angels - of 200 - who committed this sin. According to the text, these angels also taught mankind the "making of swords and knives, shields and breastplates (metallurgy); … magical medicine, dividing of roots (medicinal and hallucinogenic use); incantations, astrology, the seeing of the stars, the course of the moon, as well as the deception of man."

I gotta admit, it makes great copy. But there’s no reality behind any of this.

By Noah’s time, "The earth also was corrupt (wasting - KJV notation) before God, and the earth was filled with violence… all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." Gen 6:10-11. Afraid of the consequences, these angels appeal to Enoch to intercede with God on their behalf; God instead uses Enoch to deliver a message of judgment against them. Aside from the "taking of wives," God states that he would not forgive them for teaching mankind magical arts and warlike ways.

Which of course, ‘gawd’ was supposed to know all this beforehand, but kids will be kids, won’t they?

"According to the Book of Enoch (Not a Canonical Text), God judged the angels for producing the Nephilim. God decreed that the fallen angels (Watchers) were to be cast into Tartarus. The Nephilim were also judged and it was determined that their bodies were to return to the earth in peace but their souls were doomed to wander the earth forever (as) wandering spirits…"

Tartarus? That place exclusive to Greek Mythology, where the wicked are sent for their sins? Yeah…that’s a slight indicator that the writer isn’t who he claims to be, isn’t it?

Here’s a kicker:

The increasing acceptance and popularization of this important book among theologians helps cast light on the extra-terrestrial hypothesis (ETH) in general. Enoch is an ancient writing which states that angels (not true space aliens, as stated by many UFO cults, and popular modern authors Erich Von Daniken and Zechariah Sitchin) visited ancient Earth and polluted mankind’s DNA. While this case can easily be made solely from the canonized Bible , Enoch is yet another witness against these bad interpretations of Earth’s predelulvian era (i.e., before the flood of Genesis 6). The fact that they also gave mankind technology which supposedly "advanced our race" (but which we actually used to destroy each other, and to incur God’s judgment), lends itself to a more sinister understanding of today’s UFO phenomenon…

(Yeah, let’s ignore the reality that there is absolutely no proof that the Deluge ever occurred, outside of a bunch of shared mythological stories.)

So, get it straight people! Those tall grey androgynous humanoids aren’t really aliens, they’re actually angels (all this based on an unrecognized text rejected from a book of fables)  flying around on Ezekiel’s wheeled chariot. Doubtless this clown has his own theory based on non-canonical pseudepigrapha which explains why they regularly hand out  prostate exams to drunken rednecks out in Bumfuck, Egypt.

To paraphrase the Beatles: the crazy people, where do they all come from?

Till the next post then.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Messed-Up Bible Stories: Cain and Abel

18 June 2009

Here’s a little something to break up your afternoon. Someone I know gave me the link to these Messed-Up Bible Stories from ebolaworld.com. Put down that beverage before watching. There are three other “episodes” here at this link:

Share/Save/Bookmark

And Zen, there were the Japanese…

13 June 2009

Share/Save/Bookmark

Open mic at the GifS Cafe

11 June 2009

I can’t tackle Dr. Tiller, VonBrunn v Holocause Museum or DHS report on wingnut hate.  At least not tonight.  Religulously-speaking, not much fun-die is going on today.

So, tackle these.  Or talk about whatever.  Everything is on-topic.badreligion-thenewamerica

From my clipboard, Bad Religion:

News of the Weird, 04.05.09

The Homeland Is Secure

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration ruled in January that a post-9-11 federal maritime law, which requires comprehensive background credentials for mariners holding U.S. Coast Guard authorization on U.S. waters, applies even to the two “mule skinners” who work, in tourist season, dressed in colonial costumes at the Hugh Moore Historical Park in Easton, Pa. The park’s lone mule-pulled boat is operated in a 2-mile-long canal that is near nothing of strategic significance, said the park director. [CNN, 2-25-09]

In addition to addressing the usual state homeland-security concerns, Kentucky’s statute requires anyone licensed as a first responder to disasters to take an oath against dueling (”I, being a citizen of this state, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons … nor have I sent or accepted a challenge (to duel), nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge (to duel), so help me God”). Another provision requires the state Homeland Security Office’s executive director to “publicize” a legislative finding that “reliance upon Almighty God” is necessary to homeland security. [Kentucky Statutes Section 39G.010(2)(a), as reported in the lawyers' blog LoweringTheBar.net, 2-23-09]

Recurring Themes

That Sacred Institution (as practiced in villages in India): To prevent mysterious illnesses in the village, two 7-year-old girls were married, separately, to frogs (Pallipudupet, Tamil Nadu state; January). [The Times of India, 1-17-09]

To bring prosperity to the village, an elder married off two trees to each other (Subhasnagar, West Bengal state; February). [The Times of India, 2-9-09]

To overcome the effect of a baby’s odd-looking tooth, which is said to portend death by a tiger unless remedied, the 18-month-old boy was married off to a female dog (Jaipur District, Orissa state; February). [Agence France-Presse, 2-18-09]

For KA:

In November, the Swedish national newspaper Expressen revealed a 30-person bestiality ring operating out of a farm in southern Sweden, but the 45-year-old man who allegedly headed the group said his members were always respectful of animals: “Any of the times I did anything with (the dog), she was the one who backed into me and provoked it. She was in heat and made herself available. … There were also times later when she didn’t want to and then I backed out immediately.” [The Local (Stockholm), 11-11-08]

This is why bitches need  back-up alarms.  Beeh-beeh-beeh-beeh…

Share/Save/Bookmark

Another Episode Of Scapegoat Theater – Guess What, Folks? Atheism Is The Reason For The Economic Meltdown

31 May 2009

greenspanshrugged

"I used to get disgusted, now I try to be amused" – Elvis Costello

(Hat tip to Hairy Fish Nuts for this one)

Items keep jockeying into position for Top Ten Stupidest Things I’ve Ever Heard:

Alan Greenspan, central figure in financial collapse is devout Atheist - Why it Matters


Many believe the unregulated growth in financial derivative products,vigorously supported by Alan Greenspan, has led to the gigantic fall in our stock market, a multi-trillion dollar loss to American savings and a ruined economy.

Yeah…let’s bypass the AIG fiascos, Enron, and a foreign war we’re hemorrhaging money into.

Mr.Greenspan, in his powerful position as Federal Reserve Chairman, had consistently and forcefully thwarted all government efforts to regulate the exploding growth of the trillion dollar derivative market place. His testimony before Congressional hearings lauded the benefits of the derivative markets, claiming they reduce market risks despite warnings from Warren Buffet and others.

Warren Buffet called the financial derivative markets as a ticking time bomb and“financial Weapons of Mass Destruction”. 

Way-ell, Buffet’s an agnostic, so I guess it’s okay to quote him.

Greenspan dismissed the criticism and insisted his  support for the unregulated financial derivatives market actually lowed the risks of a financial melt down. At all times he insisted Wall Street would be a stronger and more efficient regulator of financial risk than governments, claiming that due to their selfish interests, Wall Street’s collective wisdom would avoid excessive risk.

Hmmm…according to the wiki entry, “He was lauded for his handling of the Black Monday October 19, 1987 stock market crash, which occurred very shortly after he first became chairman, as well as for his stewardship of the Internet-driven "dot-com" economic boom of the 1990s. This expansion eventually ended in a burst in March 2000 leading to an economic downturn which Greenspan famously predicted as the result of ‘irrational exuberance’.”

Well, we now have a stupendous economic disaster that is historic in nature and we can thank Mr. Greenspan, the “Oracle” for bringing our economy not only to its knees but effectively nationalizing our banking system to the extent that would perhaps make the most liberal  democrat proud.

I can imagine the author spitting that last part out.

We think it is relevant and important to understand that Alan Greenspan is a devout Atheist.  More importantly his belief system can be directly connected to the financial meltdown. Many people are not aware that Alan Greenspan was a disciple of devoted  atheist ,Ayn Rand,  and a member of her group known as the “Collective“.  After earning his Masters in `1950,Greenspan became a 20-year associate of famed philosopher Ayn Rand, author of books "The Virtue of Selfishness,""Atlas Shrugged". Greenspan wrote for Rand’s newsletters and authored a chapter for a Rand book.

Some of this is true:

“Greenspan was initially a logical positivist but was converted to Objectivism by Nathaniel Branden. During the 1950s and 1960s Greenspan was a proponent of Ayn Rand’s philosophy, writing articles for Objectivist newsletters and contributing several essays for Rand’s 1966 book Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal including an essay supporting the gold standard.

During the 1950s, Greenspan was one of the members of Ayn Rand’s inner circle, the Ayn Rand Collective, who read Atlas Shrugged while it was being written. Rand nicknamed Greenspan "the undertaker" because of his penchant for dark clothing and reserved demeanor. Although Greenspan was once recognized as a proponent of laissez-faire capitalism, some Objectivists find his support for a gold standard somewhat incongruous or dubious, given the Federal Reserve’s role in America’s fiat money system and endogenous inflation. He has come under criticism from Harry Binswanger, who believes his actions while at work for the Federal Reserve and his publicly expressed opinions on other issues show abandonment of Objectivist and free market principles. However, when questioned in relation to this, he has said that in a democratic society individuals have to make compromises with each other over conflicting ideas of how money should be handled. He said he himself had to make such compromises, because he believes that "we did extremely well" without a central bank and with a gold standard. Greenspan and Rand maintained a close relationship until her death in 1982.

In a congressional hearing on October 23, 2008 Greenspan admitted that his free-market ideology shunning certain regulations was flawed. This has caused backlash from Objectivist intellectuals, blaming the economic crisis on Greenspan’s pandering to the mixed economy and betraying his laissez-faire views.”

And in fact, he is not well loved among the Objectivists:

Admirers of Rand, however, generally see Greenspan as a traitor, since he never advocated anything that approaches Rand’s absolute laissez-faire capitalism. In House hearings during the second month of the market meltdown of 2008, Greenspan testified that he had "found a flaw" in his market ideology, and conceded that he had been "partially" wrong in opposing regulation of derivatives.

Ayn Rand, well known atheist, and famous author  is also renowned for her central role in the creation of the philosophy known as “Objectives. This philosophy espouses  a deep commitment to atheistic values, celebrates the virtue of the individual and, despises government regulation of any kind other than for crime control.  She has said "Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue." She also said about religion that “it was untrue in all its manifestations and that its consequences were disastrous.”

About the only place I actually agree with Rand is in that last sentence.

Alan Greenspan was a devoted follower of Objectivism and he was well aware of the philosophies’ contempt for religion.

So…we shouldn’t have high government officials who aren’t religious? (Rhetorical question.)

Ministry Values believes Alan Greenspan’s adherence to Objectivism and its celebration of money as virtuous, and religion as contemptuous was ultimately a contributing factor to the financial catastrophe. With his devotion to the disturbing idea that “the pursuit of man’s own-self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life“ and the implied immorality of God and religion unquestionably led to our financial debacle.

Of which the 8 years of Republican leadership had no part? Must be soothing to be so naive.

He allowed the Wall Street cowboys to run wild as he naively held to his devotion of “Greed is Good”  or  "Greed is God."  

I’m sorry, but do they give out a sheriff’s badge with the Chairman position? Were the ‘Wall Street cowboys’ atheists too? I’m betting they weren’t.

We gave the keys to the store  to a man deeply committed to Atheism and money as virtuous and he went out and nearly bankrupted the country.

Ah…hello? "For every complex question, there is a simple answer– and it’s wrong." – H. L. Mencken. The author also doesn’t understand that not all atheists are Objectivists.

MinistryValues.com  would  love to have had  a  moment  with Mr.Greenspan.  At a  recent Congressional hearing, we would  have asked him to first  pull a dollar out of his wallet  and  then we would have asked him to comment on the  well known words  found on the currency. We would have liked to hear his  comments about the words everybody is familiar with, except it seems Alan Greenspan, and those words are "In God We Trust" 

Yes, and we haven’t seen anything resembling divine intervention in…how many millennia? Ever?

Isn’t it ironic. The Trustee of "In God We Trust"  was  an  Atheist. 

Ummm, sorry, IGWT is actually a recent addition – wouldn’t ya know it, right around when Greenspan joined the Objectivists.

Had our elected leaders, simply asked Mr. Greenspan, years ago, if he believed  the United States was a nation under God ,  perhaps  we may not be in the financial catastrophe we find ourselves in today. 

And why is this? Because they wouldn’t have allowed an atheist to become Chairman. Yeah, that’s good sense (face palm).

Why is it we can try an label politicians as "socialists"  in attempt to ruin careers, yet we defend  and tip-toe around "Atheists" like they are Bambis . 

Nice that somebody finally cops to trying to ruin politicians via labeling them ‘socialists’, but I have yet to see anyone ‘tip-toeing’ around us at all.

Atheism is a man made construct, like communism or socialism and without a concern in the world we put them in charge of our financial system , for decades. This man was beholden to an ideal and   Nobody seems to get and nobody seems to care.

That’s because

  1. everything we do is a man-made construct,
  2. Greenspan’s ‘ideal’ wasn’t exactly what the Objectivists had in mind, and
  3. it’s about actions not ideology

Would we have put a known "Communist"  in the position of Fed Chair, of course not.  Yet the Atheist who destroyed our economy and a man who believes "money is the barometer of societies virtue" gets a free pass.

I think this was written by a high schooler. Obviously Greenspan’s philosophies are more complex than that. And yet, our society does give specific pay scales free passes. One only has to view the latest celebrity driving debacle, the OJ Simpson trial, the Matthew Broderick fiasco, or any of the white collar echelon that commit crimes. I wonder if these folks said anything about Kenneth Lay being a Methodist? W being protestant? Oh wait – they should give their own folks special treatment.

The next is an eye crosser:

We strongly believe in a separation of Church and State, our troops are dying in Iraq to defend that prinicipal  but  we  are still  a country of  "One Nation Under God" and now our Government, like never before, needs to defend that principal and defend it with pride and resolve.  The words need to mean something.

How on EARTH is the war in Iraq any way related to the SOCAS? It isn’t. Iraqi officials didn’t pop into our schools and demand prayer, nor did they insist on mangers on public land. And of course that irritating “ONUG” (One Nation Under God) nonsense that was implemented 54 years ago in a nation that’s well over 200 years old.

Funnier still, is this:

The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist, and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850-1898). Bellamy’s original "Pledge of Allegiance" was published in the September 8th issue of the popular children’s magazine The Youth’s Companion as part of the National Public-School Celebration of Columbus Day, a celebration of the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s discovery of America, conceived by James B. Upham.

Bellamy’s original Pledge read, "I Pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."

The pledge was supposed to be quick and to the point. Bellamy designed it to be stated in 15 seconds. He had initially also considered using the words equality and fraternity but decided they were too controversial since many people opposed equal rights for women and blacks.

But of course, Bellamy was a Christian socialist, and therefore, it’s not quite the stark red ‘A’ brand, I’d bet.

Let’s see, as I’ve pointed out in the past, there are more than enough examples of people who are markedly godfull, who will ply their trade for trinkets and money. We can go into how the Bush administration lied and thousands died (and still are dying) because ‘gwad’ told him to invade Iraq.

The fact is, that people do foolish things, regardless of their ideology. Sometimes because of it, but more often than not, it’s an easy excuse easily accepted, an automatic mulligan.

(As a side note, I always wonder why the fundagelicals can’t seem to spell the word ‘principle’ properly. Likelihood is they never went to the principal’s office, I bet.)

Share/Save/Bookmark

“I’m Confused”

20 May 2009

Haven’t you heard? The National Organization of Marriage is confused

Okay, so you have your prompt; now the rest of the thread is open for all the jokes. Make ‘em good, people…

[LINK]

Share/Save/Bookmark

And Now for Something Completely Different

6 May 2009

Just HAD to post this…

An extremely deep and philosophical video…

[Link]

Share/Save/Bookmark