Scott's Brain Meat: Religion

Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts

Monday, May 23, 2011

Rapture Repercussions

Image by TheChanel via FlickrAs many, many people have been proudly pointing out since Saturday's 6PM deadline passed uneventfully, the Rapture did not occur. Those souls deemed pure enough for immediate ascension (whose potential numbers are most likely far less than some would like) did not vacate their earthly vessels, leaving the rest of us to battle either for or against the forces of Evil in the years following the Second Coming.

Needless to say, this lack of Rapture has been the cause of much gloating. It seems that everyone wants to get in on the act of mocking and ridiculing those who were fully convinced that the world was about to become a real-life reenactment of a volume of the Left Behind novel series, and I can't really say that I blame them. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't attempted to do a little "Ha ha, the world didn't end!" pointing and laughing myself.

However, the more I thought about it, the more mean-spirited and obnoxious it seemed. Perhaps I'm just getting softer as I rapidly approach my mid-life crisis years, but the eagerness displayed by the majority of the general public and major media to deride a section of the populace for it's admittedly irrational yet firmly held religious convictions seems rather... harsh, to say the least.

Maybe my current standing as an Atheist gives me a bit of outside perspective on the whole affair. I can understand that a firm belief in the Rapture might seem ridiculous to other rational people of faith, but most of those laughing at the people running around screaming that the world was going to end Saturday are conveniently ignoring that most of their religious and spiritual beliefs are equally preposterous. I happen to know for a fact that a number of people I have heard mocking the Rapture folks still hold firm beliefs in Angels, Heaven, Transubstantiation, Predestination, Reincarnation, and a number of other religious and spiritual concepts that are equally silly when considered on a logical level.

Of course, that's the whole point in the first place: religious beliefs aren't meant to be logical. Beyond that, every different religious faction that adheres to The Holy Bible for guidance has their own specific interpretation of what the book actually "says." If we knocked every religion that didn't make any sense, everyone would end up in my camp, and that's a position I actually don't recommend, either. Just because I believe it, doesn't mean I actually like it.

Beyond all of that, however, I just really don't feel comfortable making fun of someone because their spiritual hopes didn't exactly pan our. As mean-spirited as the concept of the Rapture is, it just feels wrong laughing and pointing at the people that were convinced they weren't going to be around today. As an Atheist, that would be the equivalent of laughing at passing funeral processions because the guy in the casket isn't actually going to heaven. And despite what I may or may not believe in, that just feels wrong.

Just had to get that off my chest. You may now go back to laughing about all of those news features today about people who spent all of their money before what they thought was going to be the End of the Days. Just remember those chuckles the next time you ask that guy in the sky for a favor.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

That Sinking Feeling...

Operation Shocktober on October 18th 2008 was ...

Image via WikipediaI find that the older I get, the more I feel like the guy who accidentally joins a suicide cult, thinking it was some kind of social club. I can clearly empathize with the surreal sensation of confusion that must undoubtedly accompany the man as he stands there surrounded by smiling fanatics clad in purple robes, stares down at the Dixie cup of poison-laced grape juice clutched in his hand and thinks to himself, "Did I miss something?"

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Scalia Defends Cross On Public Land, Demonstrates Own Willfull Ignorance

Image via Wikipedia

Scalia Defends Cross On Public Land, Claims It Represents Everyone

It truly amazes me sometimes how willfully arrogant conservative pundits and lawmakers can be when confronted with the legitimate concern of separating Church and State. During a discussion about the cross that the Veterans of Foreign Wars built 75 years ago atop an outcropping in the Mojave National Preserve, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia whined and complained about not understanding what all of the fuss was about:

"It's erected as a war memorial. I assume it is erected in honor of all of the war dead," Scalia said. "What would you have them erect?...Some conglomerate of a cross, a Star of David, and you know, a Muslim half moon and star?"

If Scalia was being even remotely honest with himself and his audience, he would have recognized that drawing a firm line on the separation of Church and State is not only done to avoid the government from offering any direct legitimacy to one religion over another, but to avoid even appearing to do so. Obviously, no one is claiming that the VFW was attempting to force Christianity upon the world. But the government has an obligation to avoid even the unintended suggestion that it endorses a specific religion.

The arrogance, however, comes from the feigned ignorance of why anybody would even complain about it. The argument always goes along the lines of "It wasn't meant to be taken that way, so what's the big deal with leaving it up?" Of course, the question never asked in response is that if it really isn't that big of a deal in the first place, what's the big deal with taking it down? The same people that will fight tooth and nail to prevent a simple cross being removed from public property are the first to act in mock surprise when someone expresses the opposite. Tolerance supposedly only works one way.

"I don't think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead that that cross honors are the Christian war dead. I think that's an outrageous conclusion," Scalia complained. Of course he thinks that. And if this was about him, that might mean something. But this is about taking into the consideration the feelings of all the people who have loved ones buried at the cemetary. According to him, forcing some families to mourn their dead under a foreign religious symbol is reasonable, but giving them a neutral ground to do so is somehow absurd.

His argument about an amalgum of all religions in a monument is even more outrageous, but equally as popular. He jokes about the absurdity of trying to represent every conceivable world religion in a monument, purposely distracting from the true point that needs to be underlined, which is that you don't need to represent any religion in order to memorialize and remember those who have fallen in service of their country. To argue otherwise simply because the religious icon be displayed just happens to belong to your own religion goes beyond willful ignorance and arrogance.

Posted using ShareThis