Category Archives: Religion

Fun, Religion

One Nation under God

Leave a comment

35a2lhy_reduced

This painting by Jon McNaughton is currently making the rounds of the Internet. It’s easy enough to tell what the artist is getting at, but if you really need some rather heavy-handed hints, you can check out a full-sized picture at the artist’s own website where he also provides handy mouse-over explanations on what all of the symbolism is supposed to mean. Everyone who reads this site should know by now that I’m no fan of Christianity or any other religion, but what this artist and many other conservatives (in the modern rather than the classical sense of the word) in the U.S. are trying to do should be regarded by all Christians everywhere as being ridiculous and faintly blasphemous.

For one thing, they claim that the U.S. is uniquely blessed by the Christian God. It shows Jesus Christ appearing out of nowhere with a copy of the U.S. constitution in his hand and the Founding Fathers and deceased heroes of the country behind him. In the lower left corner, one immigrant is even depicted as cowering in shock as he realizes what the source of America’s greatness is. Of course, this is just one painting but it’s emblematic of the whole conservative movement in the U.S. For example, just take a look at the Conservative Bible Project, which is an initiative to create a better version of the Bible by removing “liberal” influences from it.

Secondly, the painting presents an untruthful view of history. The artist implies that the separation of church and state in the U.S. is the work of activist judges, hence why a Supreme Court judge is depicted as on the side of Satan, whereas in reality the separation is written in the U.S. constitution at the instigation of Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The painting  even portrays Thomas Paine as being on the side of Jesus Christ, the same man who wrote the following passage:

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

Finally, the painting infuriates Democrats because it mercilessly attacks the liberal movement (e.g. the liberal news reporter and the professor who holds a copy of Darwin’s “The Origin of Species” in his hand) while appropriating liberal heroes like Susan B. Anthony and John F. Kennedy for its own side. It even includes a black soldier who’s supposed to be a reference to Martin Luther King, Jr. as if King wouldn’t be considered a liberal in today’s political climate.

Of course, the funniest thing in the painting is the tree symbol on Jesus’ chest. The artist claims that it is a reference to the “Tree of Life” but it looks suspiciously like the White Tree of Gondor, prompting someone on QT3 to ask whether Jesus is supposed to be from Minas Tirith.

Fun, Religion

Rapture insurance

Leave a comment

To the uninitiated, the word “Rapture” refers to the events that Christians believe will happen when Jesus comes back to Earth for the second and final time. Exactly what happens then is a matter of some debate depending on the specific denomination, but generally the idea is that the “saved” go to heaven while the rest are either sent to hell or doomed to be “left behind” on the mortal plane. If the Christians are to be believed, this momentous event will be accompanied by numerous miracles, processions of angels, heavenly trumpets etc.

To atheists like myself, all of this is hogwash, but this fine group has decided to make an enterprise of selling rapture insurance. Basically, any Christian pet owner who believes that the Rapture is going to happen within the next 10 years pays them a premium of US$110.00 and if the Rapture actually happens within the insurance coverage period and the pet owner actually does go to Heaven as a result while leaving the pet behind, the group will step in to take care of the pet.

From their website:

You’ve committed your life to Jesus. You know you’re saved. But when the Rapture comes what’s to become of your loving pets who are left behind? Eternal Earth-Bound Pets takes that burden off your mind.

We are a group of dedicated animal lovers, and atheists. Each Eternal Earth-Bound Pet representative is a confirmed atheist, and as such will still be here on Earth after you’ve received your reward. Our network of animal activists are committed to step in when you step up to Jesus.

We are currently active in 20 states and growing. Our representatives have been screened to ensure that they are atheists, animal lovers, are moral / ethical with no criminal background, have the ability and desire to rescue your pet and the means to retrieve them and ensure their care for your pet’s natural life.

I have no idea how many if any customers they’ve managed to get so far but it seems like a good business idea. It’s basically asking people to put their money where their mouths are. If you genuinely believe that the Rapture is going to happen, then you should also believe that this service is delivering genuine value. Still, it’s an interesting question whether or not the group selling this is behaving ethically. After all, they are selling insurance for an event which they believe will never happen, so does this count as a scam? To me, since they openly state that they are atheists and do not believe the Rapture will happen, it is not a scam as long as they actually do spend the money that they get on arranging real foster homes for the pets registered under this scheme. It’s a win-win situation for everybody!

Politics, Religion

No need to fill in “race” for official forms in Malaysia?

1 Comment

I find the current debate about dropping the “race” column from many official government forms in Malaysia to be quite amusing. My views on the artificiality of ethnic and even nationalistic groupings are already well advertised on this blog, so I won’t go into them again. On the surface, this move is reminiscent of the French government’s official policy to never collect such details about its citizens. The basic idea is that all French nationals are alike to the government. So long as you hold French citizenship, the government doesn’t care what colour your skin is and treats everyone equally.

Of course, in our case, our minister makes it clear that race information will continue to be collected in cases where it is relevant to bumiputra special priviliges, which means that this is a blatant public relations exercise that will do nothing to change the status quo. Not that anyone expected anything more from the National Front government. But wait, if we go back to that comparison to France, you’ll find that not only does the French government not collect information about “race” from its citizens, it also doesn’t collect information about “religion”. However, as all Malaysians know, not only do our official government forms contain blank spaces to fill in your race, they also contain spaces to fill in your religion. Are we supposed to infer that while the government doesn’t care about your race except when it comes to bumiputra privileges but it does care about your religion or did the minister simply forget that Malaysian government forms also contain that entry?

To me, none of this really matters. Even in France, academics who need to study the demographics of the French population simply bypass the lack of official statistical information on race and religion simply by analyzing names instead. Given two names, say, Michèle Alliot-Marie and Rachida Dati, it’s not hard to tell who’s white and who’s not. Even though I detest the practice of classifying people into races, it’s an undeniable reality in the minds of most people and should be fought against on that level. I feel that as long as this is true, it’s more useful for the government to collect this information than to pretend that the phenomenon doesn’t exist.

One point of contention in Malaysia when it comes to bumiputra privileges is whether or not the 30% equity target for the Malays as stated in the Malaysian New Economic Policy affirmative action plan has already been reached. The government insists that the target hasn’t been reached yet so the continuing existence of the NEP is justified. However economists argue that this is only true because the government fudges its figures, in particular by using the archaic par value as opposed to market value to measure the proportion of shares held by bumiputra. It’s easy to see that by selectively collecting race information in some cases and not in others, the Malaysian government can obfuscate the true picture even more.

Politics, Religion

Did Bush ask France to attack Gog and Magog in Iraq?

Leave a comment

This Free Inquirer article has been making the rounds among atheists and agnostics on the net. In it, a senior editor of the magazine James A. Haught claims that back in 2003 when then U.S. President Bush was trying to assemble his “Coalition of the Willing” to invade Iraq, he told the French President of the time Jacques Chirac that Iraq had to be attacked because the Biblical demons Gog and Magog was at work in Iraq and that the confrontation was willed by God.

To the writer’s credit, the article details explicitly how this information was obtained so it’s hard to dismiss it as just hearsay. Still, I find it hard to believe that Bush actually meant it seriously. It’s one thing for Bush to throw in the Gog and Magog thing as a half joke, quite another thing to use it as justification to implore France to take action against Iraq. After all, why would Bush have expected Chirac to understand the obscure Biblical reference? It should also be noted that Chirac has a history of being quite derisive towards Bush’s religious beliefs, so mischaracterizing what he actually said would not be entirely out of the question.

Far from it for me to defend Bush’s record, it’s just that I believe in appropriating both blame and credit fairly and truthfully. For me, what is both more credible and ultimately more insidious are the accompanying revelations that the U.S. military regularly uses Biblical language in its reports. Quotes from the Bible for example are often used as prefaces to reports especially when it is known that the superior officer who will be reading them is a devout Christian. This practice apparently dates back from before the Bush era but seems to have become more common under his presidency. Needless to say, any attempt to reframe the mission and purpose of the U.S. military in Biblical terms, ignoring the separation of church and state, should make any reasonable person extremely nervous.

Religion

U.S. Army attempting to spread Christianity in Afghanistan?

1 Comment

For a blog that’s supposedly about atheism, I’m aware that I’ve done precious little writing on it of late. So here’s an article that, if true, makes for a great example of why government should always be separate from religion. It’s from Al Jazeera, admittedly not the most reliable of news sources especially on subject like this, and alleges that elements of the U.S. military are surreptitiously trying to proselytize to the local populace in Afghanistan.

From the article:

In one recorded sermon, Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief of the US military chaplains in Afghanistan, tells soldiers that, as followers of Jesus Christ, they all have a responsibility “to be witnesses for him”.

“The special forces guys – they hunt men basically. We do the same things as Christians, we hunt people for Jesus. We do, we hunt them down,” he says.

“Get the hound of heaven after them, so we get them into the kingdom. That’s what we do, that’s our business.”

The good news is that this is already against the U.S. military’s own rules. The bad news is that it’s not certain how far up this goes and how widespread this is. From my reading of the discussion thread on QT3 where this popped up, it seems that this is a relatively new thing and might well be another one of George W. Bush’s unfortunate legacies. To be sure, it is not the proselytization of Christianity that I oppose, even if it is illegal according to Afghan law, but the fact that it is being done by a government agency and that this clearly undermines the very mission the U.S. is performing in Afghanistan.

Politics, Religion

PAS claims “half-naked” female students at Universiti Malaya party. Does not deliver.

2 Comments

3307957115_d8e22d5528

Like any hot-blooded male, I thought that news reports that female students at Universiti Malaya had attended an event on campus “half-naked” would lead to some racy photos. So I was disappointed when the photos that eventually turned up depicted nothing that you wouldn’t be able to see on any ordinary day in Kuala Lumpur. The accusations were made by an MP for PAS, a Islamic political party, who objected to the students wearing such clothes for a Ladies’ Night event at the university. As any sane person can see, the wonder is that something so insignificant would create such a controversy at all. You can read a detailed chronology of the accusations and public relations mess this has caused in the Malay language here. It’s pretty sad that the deputy minister had to even concede that such attire should not be allowed in the university lecture halls.

As a poster on LYN, where I picked up this news from, commented, this is rather insulting to the female students who attended the event. If anything, they’re the ones who deserve an apology from that PAS MP. As a Malaysian, I’m convinced that PAS is a far better alternative than the ruling National Front but cheap shots like this for the conservative crowd are making the party lose points among moderates. There certainly are PAS politicians who sound intelligent, reasonable and can act as an advocate for Islamic values without coming across as a barbarian. Take this opinion piece by Khalid Samad, PAS MP for Shah Alam for example. He writes:

I remember Datuk Seri Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang’s lecture where he told us of a case in the time of the Prophet. A man came and admitted to the Prophet that he had committed adultery and requested that he be punished. The Holy Prophet remained silent and turned away from him. The man came in front of the Prophet and repeated his admission and request. The Holy Prophet responded in the same manner, turning away from him. The man came in front of the Prophet again and repeated the admission and request for the third time. The Prophet then asked the companions who were there witnessing this incident to take the man away and punish him as he requested.

Later the companions returned and reported to the Prophet that the man, prior to being punished, had a change of heart and ran away. They chased him and meted out the punishment. The Holy Prophet looked at his companions and asked: “Why did you chase him? You should have let him go”.

From the short story it is clear that there is no zealousness in the meting out of punishment. The Prophet only consented when the man showed great remorse for having sinned and wished himself to be cleansed. However, if that was no longer the case, the need was no longer there. Note also how the man was not questioned who his partner was. No thumbscrews. No witch hunt.

Actually it is this kind of zealousness which the non-Muslims fear from Pas and this is where we must emulate the spirit of the Islam more accurately. We should not become zealous moralists who wish to enforce their moral code on others. As I always say, preach, reason and argue with them in the best of ways. Never give them the impression that we wish to impose something on them irrespective of how noble the intentions. That was the way of the Prophet and that too must be our way.

If only all PAS politicians would heed those words.

Religion

Maker of “Fitna” film denied entry into UK

Leave a comment

Remember the post I made a while back about the short film Fitna made by Dutch MP Geert Wilders? In that post, I condemned that film for its amateurish over-simplification of the facts around Islam and pointed out that it’s just as easy to find nasty stuff written for a more barbaric time from the Christian Bible. This time around though, I find myself having to defend him because I do think that this is a free speech issue and hateful as his message is, he has a right to express his views.

As far as I can tell, the British government basically offers two basic justifications for denying Wilders entry into the UK:

  1. Free speech does not extend to shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre and Wilders’ message amounts to that.
  2. Allowing Wilders to enter the UK and express his views would threaten the public security of the country.

To the first justification, I retort that Wilders’ message in no way resembles shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre. One of the defining characteristics of the crowded theatre scenario is that it compels people to take immediate action. There is no such immediacy here and all parties will have plenty of time to reflect upon Wilders’ message before making any decisions or taking any action. Furthermore, freedom of speech is curtailed in the crowded theatre scenario only if the speaker is falsely shouting “fire”. If the theatre actually is on fire, the speaker does have the right to shout “fire”. This means that the authorities must actually prove that Wilders is making a statement that is factually incorrect to deny him freedom of speech.

The second justification basically amounts to caving in to potential terrorist threats. The line of thought seems to be that if the UK allows Wilders in to spread his message, it would make the UK a higher priority target for terrorist attacks than it already is. That’s a pretty sad position for a democracy to take. The responsibility for any attacks made by terrorists lies only on the terrorists. As abhorrent as Wilders’ message is, as far as I know, he has never advocated any violent action against Muslims. All that he has done is to try to change the laws of the Netherlands to better respond to what he sees as a threat to his country.

I happen to disagree with his assessment but from my point of view, he has done nothing that would justify depriving him of his rights. The correct response to someone like Wilders is not to prevent him from speaking. It is to ignore what he says. By making a big fuss of Wilders’ attempts to speak in the UK, the British government has simply played into his hand and given him what he really wanted all along: more publicity than he deserves.