Getting Religion

wiki byzantine

I don't understand religion.

Sometimes when I think about the effects religion has upon people I become frightened.

I see people transformed, as they describe their particular God's intentions for makind,  into those automatons that I've read participated in the French revolution.  Friends and neighbors, baker turned guillotine-operator, eyes mad with blood lust.

Perhaps I am seeing something that really is not there?  I think not.

Beliefs hold strong power over us all.  Cracking through our belief system seems impossible on both sides - whether trying to convince someone, or when confronted with evidence  that we have been so so wrong about something we'd thought we really knew.

Religious beliefs held by many confuse me.  How can a person claim to live by a law given to them by their own God:  "Thou shalt not kill" and then  add "but....it's ok under these circumstances" to the end of God's sentence?

How can a person not see that there may be things that they cannot know - like other people's Gods?  When people tell me things on God's behalf I wonder why God wouldn't just tell me himself - right?  How can people expect me to believe in their God if their God is telling them to kill people?  My God tells me NOT to kill people - it's one of his ten commandments.  Doesn't that make my God better?

We can go on forever about these belief issues - which is why we are doing everyone a service by adhering to a legal system of agreed-upon laws which we all agree to live by.  Finding a way to keep individual religions out of it is almost impossible since it seems that our laws have religious foundations somewhere along the timeline of the past.

How can a person tell me God told them something I need to know - but they can't get God to say the same thing to me out loud so I can hear it too.  Usually the next thing they tell me is I have to pony up some cash so they can do more good.  Why does their God need my money?  Yes a bit of sarcasm.

I do not wish to poke fun at religious beliefs because I have too much respect for my religious friends and also know that maybe they know something I don't know - maybe they do have a special insight in these religious matters that I do not have.  In the meantime - while we philosophize over that - we have to get on with living our lives as I have been told.

That means mutual respect - then we get into definitions of "good" religions and "bad" religions.  These are also fascinating discussions which can lead to historical "proof" of said religious beliefs backing up this or that God under discussion.  Henry Ford said that "history is bunk" which makes me wonder if that statement applies to historical proof of religious beliefs.

Yesterday I took a look at a few websites discussing acupuncture.  One site was Wikipedia and then some independent ones which gave a much more balanced and respectful viewpoint of this part of Chinese medicine.  Acupuncture may be sneered at in Western culture because it is not based on science - but does that necessarily mean that it won't work?  I thought the Hippocratic Oath was at the basis of medical morality "First do no harm" - perhaps that means acupuncture should be tried if there is a possibility that it "works" to treat maladies and causes no harm.  Perhaps acupuncture really works and is a powerful tool that we simply cannot explain using science as the medium of explanation - I don't know.  Are there parallels with religion I wonder?

In the world of peace I envision people do not have wars over religion.  But is there a possibility that this is an impossible dream if religion is at the base of our common morals.  If we no longer rely on laws - like the Constitution and Bill of Rights which seem written in an effort to minimize our tendency to fall back on religious-based decision making - then the most popular religions will be at odds with each other on certain major issues.  Religions seem to justify violent action when certain sins are committed - and voila - we have mortal combat and war.  I know the Pope has recently come out and said that "killing in the name of God is blasphemy"- but I also know that Christians in general have not heard that word because that is not what they tell me they believe.

A respect for ALL human life, at a minimum, must be our common value:  Whether a value of religion A or religion B does not matter.  What matters is finding those commonalities upon which we can all agree - then work out from there.

The alternative is to continue the tendency - whether fomented by media masters or not, toward a religious war - a war that may have to burn itself out.  A war that once started will escape the control of its masters (slaves?) leading to nothing but waste.  What are your religious leaders doing to prevent this?  Are they reminding their flocks of their duty to uphold what used to be American values like "Thou shalt not torture people,"  "Thou shalt not lie countries into wars,"  etc...??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine#mediaviewer/File:Exécution_de_Marie_Antoinette_le_16_octobre_1793.jpg

Where were all these pious religious leaders, call them saints if you wish, on television when it was time to speak out against torture, trampling of rights, spreading of fear and terror for cash prizes - where were the churches etc...???  They may have forgotten their duty to remind their parishioners
of their moral duties and to hold their public servants accountable for high crimes - but I'll bet they never forgot to pass around the collection basket!

Perhaps the fight we are really involved in here in the "States and by extension, the rest of the world, is a battle for our common values.  Common values at a very local level extending up to common values at a national level - then international.  Laws binding all parties are enacted every day - do these laws represent our values?  It seems more often than not we find ourselves confronted with laws that do not serve the common good.  Sometimes what is considered "common" changes - like the mix of religious belief systems - then the trouble begins it seems.  Doesn't it make sense to always remember that religious systems are indeed belief-based - but can only serve as the foundations for why we enact certain laws - but should never be the legal system themselves?

Or are we forever trapped within the limits of our abilities as human beings to grasp what common set of values can bring us together to create the best world possible for all of us?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

Palestinian? Where are you?

I am not a religious person. I am an American patriot. I am interested in liberty for all under an American Republic.

If you are an Israeli-firster - meaning you are willing to support Israeli actions regardless of the consequences for America - then you needn't read another word. Just tune into any "mainstream" dying TV or radio show - you can hear more self-affirmation there.

A police-detective friend of mine once told me "there are two sides to every story." If you are interested in justice - if you are interested in hearing the "other side of the story" - please tune in to Michael Rivero's "What Really Happened" radio show. Click the image icon at the top of this post. Podcasts are available.

Is Mike perfect? Is Mike the be-all end-all? Really. What I will attest to is a forum for dissent - for differing opinions - a chance for the "other side of the story" to be heard. In other words: YOUR voice. Try that on mainstream media.

Those interested in justice for the Palestinian cause would be wise to notice who the lone voices are here in America - disinterested voices - secular voices - voices only interested in assuring a republic "of the people, by the people, for the people" without favor toward ANY religion. Yours, theirs, mine, or anybody's.

Is it not true that we appreciate most what we had - once it is gone?

The voices for liberty have their limits - with regards to time, money, and energy. Like any system - entropy will bring the machine to a halt without fresh input of energy.

Freedom is not free. Not even close.

Oh - there's another option - wait for Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Neil Boortz, Wolf Blitzer, Rush Limbaugh - the list goes on. Wait for them to represent the sane members of your cause.

...and wait - and wait - and wait.

Where are the sane Muslim voices of reason in America? AWOL.

US lawmakers block money for Lebanon's army (...on behalf of Israelis)

Read entire article HERE.

" Two key Democrats, Representatives Nita Lowey and Howard Berman, announced they were holding up $100 million that has been approved for Lebanon's army but not yet spent. A senior House Republican, Eric Cantor, said future funding should be stopped too, pending an inquiry. "
-----
Note: Good - we need to stop arming people so they can settle their differences without our money or weapons. If you want American money - apply for statehood - otherwise - we're outa' cash for your religious conflicts.

Israel is self-destructing one day at a time. Their only friends left here in the 'states are the crooked money-grubbing politicians they've paid off and the Jewish and Christian Muslim-hating Zionists. And guess what - I don't care for Islam either. I am an equal-opportunity-hater of all religions - mind controllers. That's all they are. I'm too busy thinking for myself.

Take your religious problems and stick them where the sun doesn't shine. Any real American knows religion - any religion - has no place in government.

The Talibanisation of British childhood by hardline parents

Read entire article HERE.

" So why, I asked, was it acceptable for him to take pictures, but not for his child to draw a stick figure?"
----------
Note: The religious extremists - of any denomination - never cease to amaze me. Where to begin - with the hypocrisy?

'Ground Zero' mosque approved

Read entire article HERE.

" The group says on its website that its goal is to foster a better relationship between the Muslim world and the West, "steering the world back to the course of mutual recognition and respect and away from heightened tensions". "

Britain's Explanation is Riddled with Inconsistencies. It's Time to Come Clean

Read entire article here:

" -Collusion. That's what it's all about. The United Arab Emirates suspect – only suspect, mark you – that Europe's "security collaboration" with Israel has crossed a line into illegality, where British passports (and those of other other EU nations) can now be used to send Israeli agents into the Gulf to kill Israel's enemies. At 3.49pm yesterday afternoon (Beirut time, 1.49pm in London), my Lebanese phone rang. It was a source – impeccable, I know him, he spoke with the authority I know he has in Abu Dhabi – to say that "the British passports are real. They are hologram pictures with the biometric stamp. They are not forged or fake. The names were really there. If you can fake a hologram or biometric stamp, what does this mean?""

A Legacy of Regret for a Saudi Diplomat

Read more here:

" “We have not yet seen moments of joy in all that time,” the prince said in a recent interview in his office here in the Saudi capital. “We have seen only moments of crisis; we have seen only moments of conflict, and how can you have any pleasure in anything that happens when you have people like the Palestinians living as they are?” "

OK Muslims - Your turn to police yourselves-link to video

I wouldn't be fair if I didn't call attention to another religious zealot - this time on the Islamic side - making statements that should be condemned by people sharing his faith who claim Islam is a peaceful religion. From the article:
"A MELBOURNE Islamic cleric has told his male followers they can force their wives to have sex and hit them if
they are disobedient."

You can read the article and see the linked video about this Islamic cleric Samir Abu Hamza (HERE) . I can only take this article and video at face value - is it true?

As an American I must say again that I don't care what your religion is - this kind of talk from representatives of any religion destroys any chance of winning over the hearts and minds of ... well...me. I can't speak for anyone else but I think it is reasonable to conclude others will share my reaction. Where is the outcry from the Islamic community to prove this man isn't your representative? What are the rest of us supposed to think?