In order to illustrate that, below are two pictures of the odious David Barker – aspirational federal member for bigotry and ignorance.

Someone feed that man

Casting calls for Star Wars 7

Barker has been disendorsed – and rightly so – by the Liberal party as a direct result of his bigoted comments about atheists and Muslims.

http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/revealed-liberal-candidate-david-barkers-anti-muslim-campaign/story-fn5taogy-1225896534232

The disgraceful Barker describes himself as a “man of strong Christian faith”, and, in a state of apparent psychotic delusion suggested that he was “going to win this seat… claim it as mine and when I get in I will give my votes all of them to God who is on the side of the Liberal Right”.

He then went on to accuse non-Christians of “worshipping a false god”, attacking Julia Gillard for being an “atheist” and his opponent Ed Husic, for being a  “strong Moslem”.

At the same time, he described federal Liberal leader, Tony Abbott as “God’s mouthpiece in politics” before going on to say “I don’t believe God would have called me to run in this seat if he didn’t expect me to win,”

Clearly this man is delusional, a clear case for atheism if I have ever seen one. Perhaps he isn’t to blame however, he looks like he is merely half a chromosome away from being burdened with Down Syndrome.

It is hard to take someone seriously when they mention an Invisible Sky Monkey at the best of times, but when someone then goes on to say things like:

“I vote for freedom of worship if the worship is of Jesus Christ or The Jewish God anyone else well they are worshipping a false god anyway so who cares.”

“Voting should only be voluntary for Liberal and National voters the rest can not bother since with every vote they bring the nation closer to the brink of disaster and closer to the hands of a (sic)muslim country.”

“Someone get me into parliament … and watch me go. They will see my talent as the voice of … God himself.”

… it is obvious that there is something not quite right in the rats nest of synapses that they call a “brain”.

To summarise what this clown has said:

• An Invisible Sky Monkey speaks to him
• His Invisible Sky Monkey is the only real Invisible Sky Monkey
• Freedom is ok, so long as it is the kind of freedom that he approves of
• Only people who subscribe to his extreme views should be allowed to vote

It is scary that such a warped, delusional and bigoted individual was ever endorsed by a major political party in the first place. I could understand those twisted clowns at Family First or the CDP running with such an ignorant candidate, even putting him up on a pedestal and plastering Australia with posters of his deluded visage – but the Liberals?

A cynic might suggest that this kind of bottom feeding, disgusting individual; is exactly the kind of person who appeals to the traditional “aspirational” Liberal heartland (those inherent racists who don’t make enough money to be a Liberal voter though have delusions of grandeur and hope to one day be able to afford a bottle, not a cask of wine) – though one must give kudos to the “muscular Catholic”, the “mad monk”, Tony Abbott for the swift punishment that he dished out to the detestable Barker.

He was disendorsed and Abbot said: he is “gone, he’s finished”. “Attacks on people based on their religion have no place in this election campaign,”

A reasonably brave move given that he is running against an atheist and risks alienating the Christian right… actually, what the fuck am I saying, the Christian right are rusted on conservative voters come hell or high water. Still, I have to give credit where it is due, and Abbott is either maturing as a leader and a human being during this campaign or has some very talented advisors grooming him 24×7.

At the heart of the issue though is something that the slug like Barker himself raised:

‘But I don’t know if we want at this stage in Australian politics a Muslim in the parliament and an atheist running the government.’

Of course, a fundamentalist Christian is in a much better position to tell us what we can and can’t do in both our public and private life, because the one true god speaks to him and is on his side.

Religion has no place in politics, be it Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Sikhism, Scientology or any other kind of paranormal whackiness. Politics should always be based on pragmatism, logic and reason – what is best for the people no matter what their creed.

Odious, bigoted, ignorant, detestable cretins like David Barker have no place in our political landscape (or in civilised society) and we, one and all, atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, humanist, Hindu, Sikh, worshipper of the Flying Spaghetti Monster alike; should unite to ensure that these vile human beings are never afforded a position of power in our society.

Recently, a tweet caught my eye.

Posted by @mmaryannwright - it was a link to a story about two couples who were suing a hospital for failing to detect that their children were carrying the condition Trisomy 21

The allegation is that ante-natal testing was negligent and failed to detect the presence of the condition.

The parents claim that had they been made aware of the presence of the condition that they would have terminated their respective pregnancies.

The couples are suing for the depression, shock and anxiety that they have suffered as a result of having believed that they were to have a healthy child, free from defect; only to discover that they in fact were presented with a child with a chromosomal disorder.

They are also seeking compensation for the continuing costs of raising a child with such a disorder.

One of the children also suffers heart, kidney and thyroid problems and can’t walk.

The tweet that accompanied the link was:

These kind of people make me sick

That is her opinion, that is fine. I don’t know her personal circumstance, whether or not she has raised a disabled child or has a disabled sibling and as such, it would be wrong of me to form an opinion about her as a result of her tweet.

What struck me though was that in saying what she did – that they made her “sick”, she appeared to show absolutely no empathy for what the couples in question experienced.

To declare my hand (I am not going to say “pro choice” – such a misnomer) – I believe that people have the right to make an informed choice about matters which have the potential to impact their lives, adversely or otherwise.

I replied and the conversation want this way:

What I took issue with was the arrogance implicit in what this person was saying.

“These kind of people” make her “sick”.

No explanation as to why, just a judgement, no explanation as to whether or not she had walked a kilometre in their shoes, just a scathing character assessment that throughout the fragmented Twitter conversation, appeared to show a complete inability of this individual to empathise with four distressed human beings.

In her final comment to me; she said “I hope for your sake you’re trolling.”

The supreme arrogance of such a statement, along with this persons willingness to condemn people for being so terrible as to be desirous of having a choice; tells me a lot about her character, values and morals.

I will leave you to make your own assessment of this person – without knowing her personal circumstances, it would be wrong of me to perform an analysis of her character.

What I will say however is that nobody has the right to judge a fellow human being without knowing what that person has experienced, what their personal circumstances are.

Unfortunately a driving force behind the judgement of the actions of others is religion.

To suggest that abortion is wrong, that same sex relationships are abhorrent, that an unmarried woman is unfit to be the leader of a nation, that women are inferior to men – these are the constructs of religion.

Interestingly, and I am not suggesting that the person who tweeted the original tweet is religious, not for one moment – but the religious who condemn things such as abortion, homosexuality and the like forget that in their sacred text, it says:

Leviticus 21:

16 Then the Lord said to Moses,
17 “Give the following instructions to Aaron: In all future generations, none of your descendants who has any defect will qualify to offer food to his God.
18 No one who has a defect qualifies, whether he is blind, lame, disfigured, deformed,
19 or has a broken foot or arm,
20 or is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or has a defective eye, or skin sores or scabs, or damaged testicles.
21 No descendant of Aaron who has a defect may approach the altar to present special gifts to the Lord. Since he has a defect, he may not approach the altar to offer food to his God.
22 However, he may eat from the food offered to God, including the holy offerings and the most holy offerings.
23 Yet because of his physical defect, he may not enter the room behind the inner curtain or approach the altar, for this would defile my holy places. I am the Lord who makes them holy.”

For mine, this is the “sacred book” of the Christians vigorously promoting abortion.

Of course they had to get the “testicles” in there didn’t they? Jesus Christ – why are they all so obsessed with sex?!

As such, no true Christian can condemn abortion for “theraputic” reasons if they wish to claim that they honour the word of their god.

UPDATE

After I posted this, the tweets from the individual in question were (read from bottom up) somewhat amusing. I didn’t bite back and was quite nice to her, providing my email address should she wish to discuss the matter and offering her an unfettered, unedited right of reply on this page.

To date, she hasn’t accepted.

Defamation?

Some people claim that a Mexican gardener speaks to them.

Others still, assert that this (strangely Anglo looking, based on “artists impressions”) 2010 year old Jewish zombie asks them to do naughty things and vilify others in his name.

Well… they don’t actually have their own personal Jesus.

I do.

I don’t have much need for keys.

I live in a world of fingerprint and retinal scanners, swipe cards and security codes. I only possess two keys.

Still, they are important keys.

I have, for as long as I can remember; had a problem with losing and misplacing my two keys.

In the past two months however, I have never once misplaced them, lost them, been unable to find them or forgotten them.

The reason is thus:

Two months ago, a good friend of mine went to America -- land of the giant Jesus, where over half the population have a personal relationship with this wizard from ancient times.

America is the Mecca for Christians really. Creationism is rife, you can’t get elected to public office unless you speak to the invisible sky monkey (all credit to The Princess of Yesterday for that -- even though it angers my winged monkeys), there are excellent public services such as being able to write letters to heathens for them to read when The Rapture comes and you are whisked away to fellate angels on a cloud somewhere…

It is, I am told, a wondrous place.

Anyway, when my friend came back, he came back bearing gifts (and no, he is not Greek).

My swag of goodies included a poster of Chairman Mao and a Jesus keyring.

The Good Chairman was immediately framed and hung centrally in my lounge room…

Fuck me, that was spooky, as I write this, the haggard old woman on The Catherine Tate show mentioned Chairman Mao… god moves in mysterious ways.

Well fuck me twice… the next skit on the show just paraphrased a tweet from the aforementioned Princess of Yesterday -- “footprints on the heart”.

I think that Jesus *is* speaking to me… mind you the prick hasn’t given me the Powerball numbers yet.

Anyway, before I meander too far off track -- they were very thoughtful gifts, the kind that someone who has taken the time to get to know you, but loves a good wind up would give.

After hanging the Chairman up, I strung Jesus… er, attached my keys to the Plastic Saviour.

It isn’t just any plastic saviour -- it has a button that; when pressed, allows a bright light to shine out from ‘neath his robes. It is the kind of light I imagine that people see when they are dying and their brain is starved of oxygen.

It is most useful at times.

To get to the point though, ever since I affixed my keys to my own personal Jesus, I haven’t once misplaced them, never lost them, never forgotten them.

It is almost as if Plastic Jesus is my keys shepherd and they shall not want.

Whilst this trinket hasn’t yet made me lie down in pastures green, it has often lead me by quiet waters and never once abandoned me.

This has given me pause for thought, perhaps the zombie Jewish Mexican gardener cum carpenter who speaks to others is trying to speak to me.

Perhaps he is constructing some kind of living metaphor for me -- that where as once my keys were lost, now they are found; and, whilst he watches over them, never again shall they meander aimlessly through life…

It is all very confusing to me and I must confess (with thanks to The Catholic Church) that I am not waving but drowning.

Perhaps this is a sign.

Perhaps I have been chosen.

Perhaps soon I shall be given my sacred mission.

Perhaps I will reach out and touch faith…

It could be argued that anything which is dynamic – be it organic or inorganic; could be subjected to a form of evolutionary process.

Traditionally accepted evolution does tend to favour a gradual shift which is generally considered beneficial in that it promotes the survival or adaptation of a species or organism to better perform in its environment.

Language and the use of language is something that changes as new mediums, in which it is used; appear.

I would stop short of calling changes in language “evolution” however as the alterations are often bastardisations.

I am going to discuss one of the most overused and bastardised terms that one encounters during ones online experience:

• LOL

Being a keen student of language and the nuances contained therein, the proliferation of the Internet has caused me a vast amount of pain.

I suppose that it isn’t the proliferation of the medium itself that has caused the pain, it is more likely that the greater exposure to literary laziness has been at the root of the pain that I have felt.

The proliferation of said medium has merely enabled exponential access to my synapses by anyone who is moderately capable of mashing their sweaty paws on a keyboard.

Being reasonably ancient, I have been exposed to the ‘net in various forms for nigh on a score of my life.

My first modem was about the same size (and weight) of the original PS3 and ran at a ridiculously low baud rate.

At any rate, I have been exposed to this medium for quite some time.

I remember, back in 1996, whilst using ICQ – which was a sensational program until AOL purchased it… as were Netscape and Winamp… (what is it with AOL ruining everything that they acquire?) – the first time that I was confounded by a spate of acronyms that had appeared on my screen.

LOL, ROFL, ROFLMAO…

When they were explained to me, I was a little disgruntled.

The things that I said may have been worthy of someone laughing out loud, but they certainly were not rolling around on the floor laughing (unless they had been indulging in a bit of the green) and I hope that they had not been deprived of their buttocks.

I found it somewhat lazy, but didn’t bother too much about it.

It isn’t all that difficult to type in “ha ha” or similar and really only a couple more keystrokes.

To me, it was like the person who signs off, in their corporate auto signature; with “rgds”.

That is the height of laziness. Ssomeone who couldn’t be bothered to type three extra characters into an auto signature should be summarily dismissed from both their job and the human race.

I digress however.

It hasn’t been until more recent years where the abuse of the language through the medium of “LOL” has reached such epic proportions.

It disgusts me that it has, for some people; become a form of punctuation.

Not only that, but these serial abusers of the language are generally too lazy to even bother capitalising it.

For example:

“got a chopa gnr on wasteland teh othr day lol”

- lol is not a period.

“was walking down the street the other day lol and saw this fag wearing scoops”

- lol is not a comma

The acronym itself is a bastardisation of the language, however the use in modern day for, texting, chat and the like is a bastardisation of a bastardisation.

It is a mutation upon a mutation.

To suggest an analogy: if the modern day use of the term were a foetus undergoing pre-natal testing, the obstetrician would counsel the couple to consider an abortion.

I used to fight against the spread of the term in its pure format – “LOL”, but that battle has clearly been lost; much to my chagrin.

It isn’t too late however to attempt to fight against the overuse and bastardisation of the term; for it is a slippery slope my friends.

If we aren’t vigilant, pretty soon we will end up with people using the term as a pause in spoken sentences instead of a breath.

Furthermore, there are additional bastardisations of the term:

“I lol’d” or “I lold”.

This translates as:

“I laugh out loud’d.”

Strictly speaking, the term really should be:

“I l’dol”.

It is akin to “shan’t”

Whilst that is a contraction of shall not and doesn’t really make sense when you look at it – it should be “sha’n't”, it would make much more sense to “l’dol” than to “lol’d”.

The bastardisation of the language that has been seen through the mutations of the original acronym of LOL has lead to an almost complete breakdown in the ability of some people to effectively communicate – and indeed, others to decipher their jibberish.

For example:

“lol teh othr day u wer pwnd when i pwnd ur ass 2 many timez”

That is painful to read.

Whilst I often do things “for teh lulz”, I have never “lol’d” (or indeed “l’dol”).

It isn’t the acronym itself that bothers me any more; it is the overuse, bastardisation and improper use of the acronym that has me somewhat confounded.

I fret for the future of this country, and indeed, the world at large when I see this kind of degeneration of the written word as surely it is but a microcosm of the greater ills of society at large.

Some would suggest that “LOL” has become a word in and of its own.

I would vigorously contest this suggestion.

The accepted arbiter of what can be described as a word in the proper sense of the term, I would suggest; is the Oxford English Dictionary.

This mighty tome of reference lists it as an acronym derived from email, internet or text chat.

In fact; most dictionaries seem to see it in that light.

I would suggest that LOL is no more a word than GNU, SOS, PC, PS, PS3, BP, BPM, STD, RSVP or any of the commonly used acronyms that have been used over the years – many for a period spanning many more score years than this blight on the language.

It could be argued that this is not the case with RSVP – as people often request someone to “RSVP” – though I believe that this could be seen as a correct usage despite the repetition of the “please” – “please répondez s’il vous plaît” = “please please reply” and could be seen as somewhat pleading or begging.

“LOLling” or having “LOL’d” is, I submit, akin to replying “I was PS3ing” or “I PS3′d on the weekend” when a caring friend requests that you share knowledge of your activities.

I don’t believe that I have validated the use of the acronym as an expression, merely accepted that the acronym, like the common cold; is here to stay.

The premise of my diatribe is that people have attempted to turn it into a verb and/or an adjective (and indeed a form of punctuation) – which in my opinion, it should never become – and in doing so, have done it incorrectly.

It is a blight on the language akin to “ur” and must be stopped!

Join with me my friends to fight this plague, this disease.

Buy a fucking badge today.

I was inspired to write this little rant after having read this hilarious piece by “Pastor” Daniel Nalliah:

Religious nutter claims Australia is doomed because we have an atheist PM

Two screws loose and a microphone

Now you would be forgiven for thinking that the above link is a pisstake, but unfortunately; it isn’t.

Strangely though, I find myself appreciating the unprecedented audience that the Internet in its current form gives the religious nutters.

They, better than any atheist – Dawkins and Hitchens included – provide a potent deterrent to those wavering in their “faith” or those considering absconding from reason.

They also do a better job of parodying religious belief than the likes of the wonderful people over at Landover Baptist

The fellow who wrote the article on that site is also the fellow who claimed that his god murdered people in  bushfires throughout Australia. The reason? Because he was angry with homosexuals.

This fraud then goes on to say:

“Then we stretched our hands over federal parliament and prayed for ungodly leaders in parliament to be removed and righteousness to be restored”

“Many Christian Leaders believed that Kevin Rudd was God’s man for the hour and promoted him as many Christians voted for Labor in that election.   Unfortunately, due to a lack of spiritual discernment by much of the Church , Kevin Rudd was elected as PM.  He was not God’s choice, but the people’s choice.  God gave the people what they asked for”

Yes with a maybe, no with a but.

Preach to me, preach to me now - 1902 GODHATESFAGS

This kind of rubbish, the “it is god’s will” or the “he is omniscient but gives us choice” type argument is not only illogical, but it makes it impossible to have a reasoned, logical conversation with anyone of religious belief.

Those of us who have engaged in debate or discussion with fundamentalists know that it can be frustrating – and is, indeed, ultimately a waste of one’s time.

It isn’t just the fundamentalists though, that it is pointless attempting to discuss “faith” rationally with.

Faith, by its very nature, is incompatible with reason.

Why? For many reasons, but one of them is:

Because there is always a caveat.

In the case of Nalliah, his twisted caveat invokes free choice in the face of omniscience.

He is loathe to admit that when he and his deluded friends talk to their imaginary friend, nothing more than a reinforcement of their own delusions is achieved – yet who is he to question the whims and fancy of this all knowing, all wise sky pixie?

Instead of admitting that he is delusional, or that he is – point blank wrong – it is so much easier to invoke the tired old cliché of “god works in mysterious ways”, or “he is testing his people”.

Put simply:

• - Nalliah and his deluded flock prayed that the godless heathens would be removed from power
• - The most pious and piously arrogant Prime Minister we have ever had assumed office
• - Said PM, Kevin Rudd – conducted pressers from his church every Sunday morning
• - Said overtly pious PM was replaced by, gods forbid, an atheist (and a woman – let not that significance go unnoticed)
• - Ergo, Kevin Rudd was a tool of Satan and has been replaced by a heathen who will lead all Australians toward a fiery pit unless they vote for the fundamentalist Catholic Tony “The Mad Monk” Abbott

This is his god’s plan.

Nalliah is obviously missing several vital synapses in the rats nest that he indulgently calls a brain, but how is he any different than the “moderate” believers who cherry pick from the bible citing such inanities as “well, it is an anecdote, a message on how to live your life”.

No.

You either take the bible chapter and verse or you don’t take it at all.

At least fruitcakes like Nalliah and his flock have the courage of their insane convictions and completely ignore modern science, wisdom, proof, evidence and logic in favour of the superstitions of ignorant shepherds of aeons past.

The worst kind of believer is he or she who decides instead to attempt to flirt with modern knowledge yet tentatively clutches at the straws of ancient ignorance through a disheartening fear of their own mortality.

If you think that that is harsh, ask a “moderate” Christian if they believe in the story of Adam and Eve, Noah’s Ark, if they subscribe to everything mentioned in Leviticus.

I would be willing to bet my left testicle that they present to you a caveat.

The “moderate” Christians will look you in the eye and tell you that their god didn’t answer their prayer for a child dying of leukaemia because it was “his will”, yet will happily turn around and claim that their prayer for rain or the success of a friends child at a job interview was granted.

Doesn’t sound like the will of an omnipotent being to me.

Of course we know better than to stone homosexuals and adulterers to death in this day and age (do we?), though yes, this man called Jesus died and rose again, turned water into wine and raised a man from the dead…

Yes, of course, and bushfires, earthquakes, tsunamis and the like can’t be explained by science – they are of course a sign from a sky pixie unhappy with same sex attraction, abortion or an atheist Prime Minister.

Personally, I am excited about the elevation of Julia Gillard to the office of Prime Minister of Australia.

I don’t give a toss that she is a woman (or more importantly, a ranga), unmarried and childless – how do any of those things impact on the ability of a person to conduct themselves in the best interests of the nation?

They don’t, but we are, of course, going to see the tired old clichés that revolve around such issues wheeled out ad infinitum by the unthinking majority; particularly those of a conservative bent.

Such ignorance has already been displayed by a percentage of those commenting on a humourous article by Carrie Miller on The Punch:

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/gillard-is-doing-it-for-all-the-unmarried-barren-atheists/

Miller is obviously pre-empting the drivel that will be sprouted by the ignoramuses who actually seem to genuinely believe that ones contribution to society can be mesaured by the amount of children they have or their dedication to “traditional Xian values”.

To those “good Christian people” who would argue that Gillard being unmarried and childless poses a threat to the very fabric of society, renders her somehow unfit to govern, I would ask one simple question:

- How many of their popes over the past several hundred of years have been married or fathered and raised children?

I suppose that that is where I feel that the bleating about those matters should be put to bed.

Onto the mumblings about Ms Gillard’s alleged atheism or agnosticism.

Why does that matter either?

In the 2006 Census, the religious affiliations (or lack thereof) of Australians was recorded like this (courtesy of abs.gov.au):

Total Xians – 12,685,836

of the total Xians, the following denominations were somewhat lacking in numbers:

Baptist    316,738
Jehovah’s Witnesses    80,919
Mormons    53,199
Hillsong    219,689
Salvation Army    64,200
Seventh-day Adventist    55,251
Uniting Church    1,135,427

A total of 1,925,423 vocal Xian minorities.

Of the non Xians, there were:

148,119 Hindus, 340,392 Muslims and 88,831 Jews.

Those who identified as having no religion number an impressive 3,706,555 and those who don’t list a religious affiliation are at 2,223,957.

In all, there are more “heathens” in Australia than there are Hindus, Muslims, Jews and fundamentalist Xians combined.

You will often hear politicians trotting out the loathsome adage that we are apparently a “Christian nation”, yet the figures don’t bear that out – particularly when one considers that less than 20% of all Xians in this country attend church on a regular basis.

Personally I feel that a lack of religious affiliation is a positive in a leader, particularly when the alternative option has allowed his fundemantalist Catholic views to influence his policy making when he was health minister under Howard and tried to prevent the legal use of RU486, the “abortion drug”.

Certainly, when Tony Abbott, the “Mad Monk” has also gone on the record saying that he “feels threatened” by homosexuals becayse they challenge “orthodox notions of the right order of things”.

http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbott-gay-people-challenge-right-order-of-things/story-e6frfkvr-1225838477260

Do we really want to go down the George W Bush path of allowing the separation of church and state to become so blurred with a Prime Minister who will allow his policy decisions to be shaped by his unwavering belief in superstitions from several thousand years past?

Do we want to regress and enter a dark age in a modern Australia whereby homosexuals are demonised, woman are not permitted to make their own choices – or do we want a progressive, modern Australia where reason and logic are valued above superstition?

Had Rudd stayed in power, I would have been unable to vote for either of the major parties and would have parked my vote as a protest, somewhere else.

Now that we have a clear and decisive choice – between a strong, dedicated, hard working, pragmatic, disciplined ranga and an emotional, superstitious, fundamentalist loose cannon – my decision has been made quite easy.

My tip – Labor with an increased majority at the next election (to be held in August).

PS – I reckon that Julia would look a lot better in budgie smugglers as well

It didn’t disappoint and I look eagerly forward to the next episode.

Safran , a cynical, skeptical Jew, has mastered the art of being “offensive” without managing to offend. No matter how controversial his pranks and stunts are, it is almost impossible to become outraged by anything that he does.

I think that that may possibly be because he seems so fragile, non threatening, nerdy, and to a point, almost timid.

Of course it is all part of the act and one which has seen him get away with such stunts as running naked past the Wailing Wall, apply for membership of the KKK after telling them he was a Jew and go doorknocking in Salt Lake City, Utah -- telling those who opened the door that there was no god.

That said, the ABCs director of TV warned “sensitive” viewers to stay away from the show.

I don’t think that it would get an airing in places like the US or Iran…

Below is a promo video for the series and underneath it, a link to an MP4 of episode one of the show for those who live outside Australia.

Enjoy.

Race Relations -- Episode 1

Acts 9:11:

And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth

Praise be to the superstitious peasants that wrote it and those re-wrote it all those years later in one of the earliest recorded examples of censorship.

This is clearly evidence of a prophecy of some kind and I must devote myself to investigating just why this ancient tome was able to predetermine the existence of both the internets and my cat so many many years ago.

Actually, no I shan’t, I shall just deify my cat and claim tax exempt status for my website and associated costs  and then I shall go about ignoring the rest of the sacred text because it doesn’t suit me.

Hmm, I like this whole religious idea…

I prefer direct evidence, logic and reason.

It is interesting to note though, that in the past 48 hours, there seems to have been a pattern of what appears to be a deliberate attempt to silence critical opposition to reason.

Firstly there was the sustained and continuing DDoS attack on the atheist convention website http://www.atheistconvention.org.au/.

Due to the technical nature of what has happened here, with the attacks moving to the IP after the domain name was null routed and then the new IP being subsequently attacked, one could make the assertion that this was a targetted attack on logic, reason and freedom of thought by those who feared it in some way.

There is an article in The Age on the attack on the atheist convention website.

Today, we have seen the twitter trending topic “no god” suddenly disappear and be replaced with “know god”.

The “no god” topic, started by a theist http://www.examiner.com/x-8776-Boston-Atheism-Examiner~y2009m10d20-No-God-war-raging-on-Twitter seemed to backfire when rationalists, humanists, secularists, atheists and free thinkers decided to have a bit of fun.

Religious types became somewhat outraged by this, though in their outrage, assisted the topic in trending by repeating the phrase and adding the #nogod hashtag.

A war waged, with the theists becoming increasingly upset and leading many people to speculate that twitter had censored the “no god” topic due to pressure by religious organisations for fear that they may offend them.

As we know, one is not supposed to question “faith”, it just isn’t polite to suggest that a grown adult has conversations with themselves inside their own mind (unless of course they have a certificate).

Perhaps it wasn’t due to pressure by the theists, perhaps it was just due to “operational reasons” and the amount of fail whales that began to appear as the topic trended, but both of the aforementioned events raise an interesting point:

Why do religious types feel so threatened by people advocating logic and reason and daring to question their unsubstantiated “faith”?

The DDoS attack on the atheist convention website is clearly the work of persons or groups who are offended or outraged by the thought of a viewpoint that differs to their own and, instead of engaging in robust debate in a supposedly free society, they seek to silence any opposition to their view.

Perhaps they have gnawing self doubts and are terrified that and exposure to critical thinking, reason and logic will disrupt their blissful ignorance or perhaps they are just conforming to the theistic stereotype that makes a wonderful argument for the “slippery slope” that leads to such wonderful things as theocracy.

The outpouring of outrage by theists when “no god” was trending is another example of this. Instead of engaging critically, there was, to paraphrase the Nazarene; “much wailing and gnashing of teeth”.

Typical of the “very christian” sentiment espoused is this lovely piece:

“@PrttyBella All #nogod supporters shouldve been ABORTED & im against it but ima have 2 do an exception #GOODISGOOD!!!!!!!!!! ( #No God )”

One does wonder why a group, so convinced by their beliefs and “faith” that some of them are willing to die for it (and all of them are content to abdicate reason) would need to behave in such a manner that seeks to silence their opposition, rather than one that seeks to prove their postulations.

One possible reason could be that they know that their position is untenable, and, like a petulant child that covers its ears and screams out “lalalalalalalala” when faced with a request that they wish to ignore; have chosen to create white noise and interference instead.

It is sad that human nature has yet to evolve to the point whereby we can all engage critically and without fear; and that some people use the technology that science has bequeathed us with to engage in modern day crusades.

An evaluation of the trending topics in this debate can be seen here:

http://religionlulz.blogspot.com/2009/10/twitter-censorship.html

Footnote: It seems as if the “Know god” trending topic has now been given the ability to search for either “no god” or “know god” from twitter’s website:

http://twitter.com/search?q=”Know+God”+OR+”no+god”

The topic name as represented on the site however has been changed from “no god” to “know god”

Conspiracy theories aside, that seems somewhat suspicious.

It would seem to be a parody of  “The captain of the push”, which was attributed to Lawson and it is claimed that the lewder version was also penned by him, though he chose not to put his name to is.

Enjoy.

As the night was slowly falling over city, town and bush,
From a slum in Bludgers Alley came the Captain of the Push,
And his whistle loud and piercing roused the echoes of the Rocks,
And a dozen ghouls came slouching round the corners of the blocks.

Then the Captain jerked a finger at a stranger on the kerb
Whom he qualified politely with an adjective and verb.
Then he made the introduction: ‘Here’s a covey from the bush-
Fuck me blind, he wants to join us, be a member of the Push.’

Then the stranger made this answer to the Captain of the Push,
‘Why, fuck me dead, I’m Foreskin Fred, the bastard from the bush.
‘I’ve been in every two-up school from Darwin to the ‘Loo,
‘I’ve ridden colts and black gins, what more can a bastard do.’

‘Are you game to smash a window?’ asked the Captain of the Push.
‘I’d knock a fucking house down,’ said the bastard from the bush.
‘Would you take a maiden’s baby?’ said the Captain of the Push.
‘I’d take a baby’s maiden,’ said the bastard from the bush.

‘Would you dong a bloody copper if you caught the cunt alone,
Would you stoush a swell or Chinkie, split his garret with a stone?
Would you have a moll to keep you, would you swear off work for good?’
‘What? Live on prostitution? My fucken oath I would!’

‘Would you care to have a gasper?’ said the Captain of the Push.
‘I’ll take the bloody packet,’ said the bastard from the bush.
Then the Pushites all took counsel, saying, ‘Fuck me, but he’s game.
‘Let’s make him our star basher, he’ll live up to his name.’

So they took him to their hideout, that bastard from the bush,
And they granted him all privileges appertaining to the Push.
But soon they found his little ways were more than they could stand,
And finally the Captain thus addressed his little band.

‘Now listen here, you buggers, we’ve caught a fucking tartar,
At every kind of bludging, that bastard is a starter,
At poker and at two-up, he’s shook our fucking rolls,
he swipes our fucking liquor, and he fucks our fucking molls.’

So down in Bludgers Alley all the members of the Push
Laid a dark and dirty ambush for the bastard from the bush.
But against the wall of Riley’s pub, the bastard made a stand,
A nasty grin upon his dial, a bike-chain in each hand.

They sprang upon him in a bunch, but one by one they fell,
With crack of bone, unearthly groan, and agonising yell,
Till the sorely-battered Captain, spitting teeth and gouts of blood,
Held an ear all torn and bleeding in a hand bedaubed with mud.

‘You low polluted bastard,’ snarled the Captain of the Push,
‘Get back to where your sort belong, that’s somewhere in the bush:
And I hope heaps of misfortune may soon tumble down on you,
May some lousy harlot dose you till your bollocks turn sky-blue.

May pangs of windy spasms through your bowels dart,
May you shit your fucking trousers every time you try to fart,
May you take a swig of gin’s piss, mistaking it for beer,
May the next push you impose on toss you out upon your ear.

May the itching piles torment you, may corns grow on your feet,
May crabs as big as spiders attack your balls a treat,
Then when you’re down and outed, to a dismal fucking wreck,
May you slip back through your arsehole, and break your fucking neck.’