Grant Rants

Archive for the ‘Isn’t it absurd?’ Category

The stupid it burns: anti-vampireism and bald as a hair colour edition

- May 14th, 2012

Greetings heathens, zealots, web denizens, and the rest of you!

Ok, I have some ranty mojo brewing today and I’m in need of a target. Fortunately, the world is a big place with more stupid than it is possible to catalog, and it was easy enough to find one. Just up the highway in fact. In Toronto, that mythical center of the known universe.

Specifically, a column by rabbi Dow Marmur, who evidently doesn’t like us heathens very much.  The problem with we atheists, he says in a meandering column in the Toronto Star, is that we are pretty much like jihadists:

I’ve, therefore, consistently refused to engage in debates with atheists. They may consider me a cowardly man of little faith who’s afraid of exposing himself to the truth, but impartial observers will know that contemporary atheists are often even more fanatical than religious fundamentalists. Their zeal seems to know no bounds.

Interesting. Last time I checked, the most fanatical religious fundamentalists in North America try to have their dogmatic nonsense taught in science classes and are obsessed with telling women what they can do with their bodies, including a hilarious Republican bill that passed recently in Arizona that defined pregnancy as starting two weeks before conception. (no, that is not a punch line.) In even more extreme cases in North America, Europe, and of course, the middle east, the fundamentalist set is busy killing other people, often using that delightful method employed by the truly deluded, suicide bombing.

Atheists write books and blogs.thestupiditburns Oh, the horror, the horror.

He Marmur points to Alian de Botton’s weird newish book Religion for Atheists, where in de Botton says he wants to build atheist temples, as some manner of evidence that atheism itself is becoming a religion (which is why we are worse than the worst religious fundamentalists….you know without the bombs and such) and in fact, heathens have “religion-envy.”

Ok, look, first de Botton strange book was greeted with disinterest by the atheist community, such as it even exists, and the most anyone could say about it was “uh, what?”

It’s true, there are atheists who seem to want to ape the group cohesion provided by most religions, but it’s an attitude I’ve always found puzzling. It’s why I don’t belong to any skeptic/atheist/humanist groups nor go to regular meetings. I don’t have any need to get together with people to talk about what I don’t believe in. I tend to, this rant notwithstanding, focus my commentary in his regard on attempts to breach the wall between church and state, or religious attempts to undermine basic freedoms like freedom of speech, or attempts to win converts by stealth (like the ongoing efforts of the Gideons to be given access to elementary public school children.) But sit around and talk about why I don’t believe in the existence of gods? Zzzzzz. Please. I’d almost rather watch Glee.

Marmur’s entire argument crumbles because it starts with a false premise. He treats atheism as though it’s a thing like Christianity or Scientology or Jedism something. The tacit assumption he makes is that atheism is a complete philosophical entity, with dogmas, and rules and holy books and, I would guess, priests or clerics or some sort that one obeys. And uses this argument as he defends the excesses and violence of religion:

Because religion is articulated and administered by human beings, it often falls short of its stated ideals — just like atheism.

Really? Really, Rabbi Marmur? And what ideals are those exactly? Where do I find them? Where, in the name of Zeus’ holy toga, do I find the “stated ideals” of atheism?

Look man, atheism is barely a thing at all. All atheism is just not believing in a god or gods. Period. QED. End of frakkin’ story. The only reason we have a name for it at all is because historically everyone around us has been totally hell bent for leather on this whole god business.

I mean, even the name “atheism” is pretty stupid because it dignifies the thing that it denies. Look, I don’t believe in vampires or big foot either, right? But there is no need to run about calling myself am “anosferatuist,” or an “asasquatchist,” is there. The bottom line is that atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour. The “ism” at the end makes it all sound fancy, I guess, but it isn’t.

I pretty well agree with Neil deGrasse Tyson on this front when he says “at the end of the day I’d rather not be any category at all.”

Even the so called “atheist community” is a disjointed lot that is only bound by the disbelief in the supernatural and generally shared respect for science, evidence and reason. There is also some broad agreements on the values of democracy, freedom of speech and the like. Beyond that, it is pretty well, to use the cliche, like herding cats. Disagreements abound. Yes, Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet, Harris, PZ Myers and a few others are the most public and well known of the so called “New Atheists” (which is only new by the authors refusal to shut up when told.) but they constantly disagree. Tyson and Dawkins’s disagree over how to talk about science and religion in popular culture. Myers recently took Harris to task over issues of racial profiling at airports. And I’ve lost track of how many non-believers were sharply critical of Hitchen’s views on the Iraq war.

But I am sure Marmur will tell us where in that mess there are the “ideals” of atheism. Or is that the sound of cricket’s chipping?

About the only thing that Marmur gets right is that religion allows people to form a community of believers and atheism doesn’t do this. Well, yes. So what? De Botton’s goofy book aside, how is that supposed to an argument against atheism, or put more correctly, for religion? Does it demonstrate the existence of a god? Because that is what it would take, son. That pesky thing call evidence sort of matters.

Ultimately, Marmur’s entire argument seems to boil down to the idea that religion makes you feel good, and atheism doesn’t. I suppose that could be right. Atheism provides no guidebook, no bromide of any sort. Attempts to make it do so are as foolish as attempting to grasp quicksilver. To me, not having that kind of crutch is freeing. Yes, life can be miserable. It can suck. It will, as Rocky says. “beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently  if you let it.”

Speaking only for myself, I would rather harden myself to deal with it than rely on help that isn’t there because it makes me feel good to believe there is. I would rather deal with life as it is, honestly, and be miserable than to cling to some manner of false hope. If atheism is a thing at all, it’s living life on your own terms, taking the awful and the good as they come.

In the inverse Law of Bill Donohue

- April 13th, 2012

There is a universal fact. Like gravity. Or the awesomeness of Mass Effect 3. (yes, yes some fanboys are having mental melt downs about the endings, but I figure they have been indoctrinated. If you don’t get that joke, go play the game! Seriously…go!)

Essentially, if Bill Donohue’s Catholic League in the United States hates something, it’s probably something worth checking out. His most recent explosion of hot hair is about the Three Stooges remake. There are lots of reasons to be offended by this remake. Remaking the Stooges is like remaking Casablanca. Sure you can do it, but there isn’t a single reason for it. The trailer for the thing looks Zeus awful and pretty well indicates the Stooges, classic though they were, were indeed products of their own time. I can easily think of a bazillion things I would rather do than see it. And yes, bazillion is a word.

However, this is not what upsets the always upset Bill Donohue, the grand pooba of the Catholic League. What upsets him is that a nun in the film appears in a bikini, aka the “nun-kini.” I guess Billy is upset because nuns cannot wear bikinis. It says so in the Bible or something, maybe. This the same guy who attacks films, books and other art if it offends his porcelain sensibilities in the slightest. This is the same guy who claimed that Hollywood was run by, and I quote: “secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It’s not a secret, OK? And I’m not afraid to say it.” (He said that in defense of the ghastly “Passion of the Christ” film.  So bikinis on film bad. Two hours of watching a guy get graphically tortured, that’s ok. Just sayin’)

Anyway, in keeping with the Inverse Law of Donohue, and although it will likely injure my brain, I’ll have to check out the movie.

I get email: God needs a sponsor

- April 10th, 2012

Greetings heathens, zealots, web denizens, and the rest of you!

So by now I am used to getting email from religionists who are hell bent, if you will excuse the phrase, on converting me. Mostly Christians. On very rare occasions Muslims. Never Jews or Buddhists though. Weird that.

Anyway, I am actually not sure what religion this email is supposed to represent. ChristIslam or something I guess. It’s an email asking me to sponsor “God Allah” (which technically speaking would translate to “god god”. But never mind the fine details.) for the resurrection. So I guess this is like a walk-a-thon of some kind? You sponsor god, and for ever $5 he raises he resurrects a Hebrew carpenter? Well, you tell me then!thestupiditburns

Also it appears that god will just take anyone to be sponsor him. It’s been a while since I have been in Sunday school, but I distinctly remember the big fella being somewhat more discerning about who he choose to as someone to smite or be a minion. And of course, as always, it appears god needs money. Like the late George Carlin used to say, he’s all powerful and all knowing but he just cannot handle money!

Finally, since when did god get an email address? What happened to the burning bush method of communication? Who’s his service provider? I assume he is using wireless tech. Not sure how one extends a coaxial cable into the afterlife…

Anyway, this certainly goes  in my file of “most bizarre and nonsensical emails that do not involve a politician or Glee.” Enjoy:

Official Third Millennium Arrival of GOD ALLAH
**********************************
Allah wants to partner with you for the purpose of saving planet Earth.
Allah wants to locate sponsors for The Resurrection.
All applicants automatically accepted ; however, We require more sponsors which may include business, organizations, communities, and groups.
Please do reach out to Us over email; We respond within twenty-four hours or sooner. Thank you for your review.
Love,
ALLAH

I get feedback: the gay conspiracy agenda edition

- January 30th, 2012

Greetings heathens, zealots, web denizens, and the rest of you!

So it seems my last column has touched more than  few nerves, given by the piles of emails that hit my inbox over the weekend. No surprise really, given that I was poking Ontario Catholic educators in the eye for their “alternative” to gay-straight alliances in their schools in recent guidelines that create “respecting differences” groups for students that do none of the things gay-straight alliances do.

Essentially, I have hard time accepting all the talk of respect and dignity in recent Catholic school guidelines that turn to the Catholic Catechism as it’s foundational document — a catechism which regards homosexuality as being fundamentally depraved. This cannot, I wrote in the Grant Rant, either respect and help gay students, nor will it do much to prevent bullying.

Well, I suppose it was inevitable that someone would try to defend these guidelines. And it was equally inevitable that gay bashing would be part of it. To whit, I offer this bit of feed back to the column for a reader who goes by the handle “thatsallfolks”:

Typical left-wing, religion-bashing distortion. LaFleche is trying to restate Catholic beliefs by accusing Catholics of labeling homosexuals depraved when their teaching clearly reveals that it is “homosexual acts” which are “distorted” and “depraved”. There is a BIG difference between the sin and the sinner. Christianity commands us to love the latter and hate the former.

Wonder when Mr. Grant will do a piece on the inappropriate homosexual indoctrination which is occurring in the youngest grades of our PUBLIC school system via a cloaked anti-bullying curriculum? Can’t we just have generic “bullying” education REGARDLESS of race, sex, and gender? Funny I can’t recall anyone reaching out to the obese, the less than beautiful, or the “four eyes” population like myself?

Oh where to begin?

First, he is technically correct when he says the Catechism describes homosexual “acts” as fundamentally depraved and disordered. And this becomes the first line of defense for this kind of discrimination. You know, the whole “love the sinner, hate the sin” stuff.

First, it’s a fairly absurd precept to being with. It’s a bit like saying “oh well love Darth Vader, but hate Death Star.” I mean, what?

More important for our discussion here, however, is to point out that people are what they do. To say that is fine and dandy to be gay so long as you never have an actual relationship with another gay person is like saying “oh it’s ok for that animal to be a bird, so long as it doesn’t fly.”

Ultimately, it’s just a cover. A po’ duck game of semantics that is used to try and defend a point of view that is fundamentally unfair, unrealistic, outdated and discriminatory. Attempting to the draw the line between gay people and gay sex is a meaningless distinction.

But Mr. Thatsallfolks and a few others readers — not many, mind you, but enough to get my attention — go a step further than this Through the Looking Glass rationalization. I am referring of course to talk of the evil gay agenda bent on turning school children to a legion of homosexuals who will, from what I can gather, destroy the world. Or at least join the cast of Glee or something. Well, you tell me! It’s like these bozos think that gay people gather together in secret meetings and plot the take over the world, one child at a time, until there isn’t a straight person left. It’s never made even a little bit of sense.

The talk of “homosexual indoctrination” and the “gay agenda” is exactly the consequence of the kind of policy the Catholic Church is trying to enact in Ontario’s (public funded) Catholic schools. Once you point to a segment of the population and say “oh THOSE people are screwed up” which is what the church does, it becomes easy to define them as a “them” against you “us.” And of course “them” are always bad, always up to do something to undermine the “us”. I mean, if you listen to all the talk of the gay agenda and replace “gay” with “Jewish” you have something that resembles the paranoid rhetoric from Germany circa 1939.

So I will say it once: there is gay agenda bent on destroying school children in the same way there is Bigfoot, the Lochness Monster, UFOs, a good James Bond movie before the Daniel Craig version and sugar coated happy endings for all us. IT DOESN’T EXIST!

(On the other hand, there is an identifiable Catholic “agenda”. The entire outfit exists to spread the faith by converting, well, everyone. There aren’t gay churches designed to turn straight people gay, are there? So…just sayin’.)

The bottom line here is that that is being established in Ontario’s Catholic schools with public tax dollars is institutionalized discrimination, and that is something that needs to be very carefully looked at.

The Burning Stupid: Mock the Pope edition.

- January 10th, 2012

Greetings heathens, zealots, web denizens, and the rest of you!

I know I haven’t been been blogging much lately. There was the pre-holiday crazy, the during-the-holiday madness, the post-holiday blues, the post-post-holiday blues hangover,  and House MD marathon.

So I sat down this morning and figured it was time to return to the blog. What, but oh what, could I write about?

Turns out I didn’t have to look that far. After about three second of looking through Google news, I hit upon this fun story about the Pope claiming the future of humanity was in danger. What, you may ask, could threaten us as a species? Mecha Godzilla? The cast of Glee taking over the world? Zombie-robot apocalypse?

All good ideas, dear reader, but no. The thing that threatens our very existence on the planet is….dun dun duuun! GAY MARRIAGE.

Seriously. Pope Benedict is claiming that gay marriage is a threat to the species:

The pope made some of his strongest comments against gay marriage in a new year address to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Vatican in which he touched on some economic and social issues facing the world today.
He told diplomats from nearly 180 countries that the education of children needed proper “settings” and that “pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman.”
“This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself,” he said.

Let that little bit of burning stupid bounce around in you skull a bit. If it makes any sense to you at all, let me know.

I mean, there are things that could potentially threaten the future of humanity, like say the planet getting hit with a giant asteroid. Or the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Or our continued and careless misuse of our natural resources. Or the scarcity of clean water. Or growing global economic inequity. Theocratic governments with powerful weapons. Evolved bacteria resistant to our medications.

But the Cardinal of Rome has precious little to say about any of that. No, no, no. The real problem is two men, or two women, living together and getting the same tax breaks as a straight couple. Ooooh scary.thestupiditburns

When, by Odin, will this anti-gay marriage claptrap end. WHEN? Cause I have to tell you Popey, and the rest of the bigoted “gay marriage is s threat to everything” crowd, you don’t have an argument. You don’t even have something that smells vaguely like an argument. Calling this line of reasoning an argument is like looking at a gold brick and saying that it’s Saturn.

I have yet to hear an argument against gay marriage that made any sort of sense whatsoever. “My holy book says so,” isn’t an argument. If you are not gay, and don’t want to marry a gay person, you don’t have to! But to claim that civilization, nay, humanity itself, is threatened because of gay marriage is akin to Walter Ostanek opening for AC/DC. It’s INSANE. How does gay marriage threaten the future of humanity? Well, according to the Pope, it just does. QED.

Ugh. I need a bottle of aspirin here.

Yes, I know, you are going to claim, Mr. Pope, that you are just following what’s in the Bible, and if it is in the Bible, it totally cannot be bigoted right? I mean, it makes no sense that bronze aged texts written by people who whose sum total knowledge about the universe was nearly zero might contain unethical and immoral pronouncements about people who didn’t fit their social norms, right? Human moral and ethical reasoning could not have possibly grown and evolved over the last 2,000 years of civilization. That is just crazy talk, isn’t it?

Look, hiding behind ancient texts, and claiming those texts are the infallible word of a god no less, to attempt to strip people of their civil liberties and demonize doesn’t make them less cruel, less out of touch, less useless or less harmful. It’s just feeble reasoning that has no basis in anything other than old hates. That is all Ratzinger is doing. Keeping hateful ancient, narrow minded, memes alive.

(Oh and if anyone tries to say “hate the sin, love the sinner”, I might punch you. Or at least mock you until you weep.)

He doesn’t deserve respect because of his title. Nor because of group of gruesome old celibates voted him to be their leader. Nor because he presumes to tell the world what they should do in their private moments. Nor because he has the gall to try to tell democratically elected governments how best serve their citizens. His status as a “holy man” shouldn’t protect him from criticism.

So long as the Pope and his followers choose to demean and attack people whose only “crime” is choosing to commit to someone they love, he deserves nothing but barbed mockery until he decides to catch up with the rest of us who live in the 21st century.

Election update: Godzilla for Premier! RWWWAR!

- September 16th, 2011

I have a thought.

We’re hip deep in the Ontario election now and if there is one thing we can say for sure, it’s that none of the party leaders are really winning the hearts or minds of voters. I suspect that this is mostly due to the public becoming numb to the same old, same old when it comes to electioneering. Same promises, same attack ads, same everything.

So far, the election has been a rather hum-drum affair. What we need is  a candidate to shake things up, to present new and exciting policies and just find a new way to do politics.

Therefore we should elect Godzilla to run Ontario.  Not the “Godzilla” from that horrible 1998 remake. I’m talkin’ the real deal. The guy who ate Tokyo and sent Mothra packing. (A big butterfly against Godzilla? I mean, please…)

Now, I know that sounds maybe just a tad insane, right? Technically, Godzilla is a Japanese citizen which would disqualify him from running here. But, in an application of the the Liberal’s policy of assisting immigrants by giving employers tax credits, I think we can manage this. We, the voting public, hire Godzilla and then we, the voting public, get a tax break. Problem solved.

Now, I know there are other giant monsters we could elect but, upon reflection, they are poor candidates. King Kong has that whole kidnapping charge to deal with, the Staypuffed Marshmallow Man lost the religious vote when he stepped on that church in New York, and Jaws is just soft on crime.

Where would Godzilla stand on issues of public policy? Well, his health care plan would be totally outside the box thinking, which is what our health care system needs. Basically, because people flee in the face of Godzilla (often screaming “Gaika, Gaika!!!!”), these people become more fit. All that running and jumping over things and avoiding blasts of radioactive fire inevitably will create the fittest population in Canada. (Ok, true, there will undoubtedly be a few losses. The slow, the weak and fans of Glee will likely be eaten by our premier. We can chalk that up to “hard choices”, like tax cuts. ) Having such a fit population will reduce health care costs. It would likely also result Ontario athletes being over-represented on our Olympic track and field teams, and lead to more gold medals.

godzilla

Godzilla's jobs policy in action!

Godzilla’s jobs policy is also impressive. When he is not making origami (come on, those little hands have to be good for something!) Godzilla is often found destroying infrastructure. There are many roads, bridges and public works in Ontario in need of repair or replacement. So Godzilla is saving the province and municipalities money by destroying these things himself. Jobs will be created to rebuild them and, lets face it, the new infrastructure will have to be strong enough to withstand future Godzilla attacks, giving Ontario the best roads, bridges and public buildings on earth.

I’d go on, but I think you get the point. If we’re bored by the current leaders of political parties, vote Godzilla. It’s no stranger than any other choice you could make .