In God's Name...

I'm tired, so this will be close to a ramble. But I want to get it out. (My day, by the way, was passable. Not much to report).

Christian Fundamentalists (the latter syllables being the operative ones) were featured on Channel4 just now, 8-9pm. Nadine Dorries featured, which is shocking considering she often denies connections with Christian movements. She says she's "there for everyone" but I can't remember the last time she listened to any of the massive amount of pro-choice evidence in the country.

These CFs amuse me. Christians in general are very funny to me, but the fundamentalists more so. At least crazed Jihadits have the balls to come out and say they want to kill everyone who's not part of their zany scheme. The whole Christian gig has this 'love everyone' kick. Even more annoying is the sense of 'if you're not with us you're completely and utterly misguided, you poor, Godless fool'. Zealots, pure and simple. All because of blood religion.

Example: I support Liverpool Football Club. My friend supports Manchester United. Currently, they have different things going for them and against them. I can talk about Liverpool's fantastic performances in Europe, they could talk about Manchester United's Premiership dominance. We could debate on those points, amongst others.

Religion isn't involved, therefore neither of us could turn around and say: "I'm right because a mystical figure is on my side." Well, we could, but it wouldn't be true. As soon as you involve religion in an arguement, it just gets silly.

Don't get me wrong - I have my faith, I like faith. Just not when it causes wars or suffering. Which is usually when people try to force it on everyone else like these people are trying to do, whether they admit wanting to be despots or not. '20 Reasons for 20 Weeks' is funded by groups like 'Right to Life' and all that shit, which is religious and 'moral' in it's findings. They want to control the destiny of thousands upon thousands of women. That's just one example of what these Christian Fundamentalists would like to do, given the chance. They protest against Mosques being built because they consider Allah to be a false prophet/the devil, depending who you speak to. They protest at gay meetings because they think people being gay is the work of the devil.

At least Jihad-loons have the evil honesty to hate all outsiders. CFs dress it up as it these people can be 'saved'. If, that is, they turn their backs on all they hold dear. And why? Because they say so. Although they'll tell you it's not their will, but the will of God. Convenient, that.

I have a real ying against people who try to force their way of thinking onto the general population. I'm quite pro-chaos, I suppose, although realistically we don't have it too badly as we could have it underneath a religious regime. I mean, I know we live under a government that has it's own way of running things but it could be the lesser of most of the evils.

As a final point, the concept of praying. There was a man on the programme who had called his Driving School 'MiracLe'. He said he prayed for customers when they ran dry, and God delivered them to him. Obviously, without financial records it'd be difficult to work out just how many customers 'God' brings him, but I'm sure the telephone numbers on his car that's out on the roads most days don't hurt. Some Christians have this idea of 'P.U.S.H.' - 'Pray Until Something Happens'. And if it doesn't happen, God didn't want it to happen. So if you want something to happen and it does, thank God. If it didn't, then you were wrong in the first place to want it. The whole concept just makes me laugh.

Now for something completely serious...

Excellent post by Unity over at MoT

Nadine Dolt-iss might be dangerous if she rubbed her brain cell onto the other one, but she is still a minor annoyance, especially when channelling the far-right zealot views she propagates.

Thankfully, there are people like Unity around to pick their propaganda apart.

One of the more important issues, to me, is simple. So what if babies survive more earlier than 24 weeks? Just because they do, doesn't mean women should be obliged or forced to have them. It's the choice of that individual as to whether they wish to give birth or not. That's not the view of the religious nutjobs out there, clearly, but I'll keep shouting to make it heard, and I'm glad others will, too.

Pick a lane...

http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifHybrids

Sounds sci-fi, I've always thought, but it's pretty understandable science. Science which could lead to major health benefits and lives saved.

Obviously, religious zealots don't want it done. They have their reasons which they're happen to bore anyone about, so I'm not going to concentrate on them here.

My issue is with the Supreme Leader* is that about this so-called 'free vote'. To give or not to give. He has decided to kop out, again, which is becoming an annoying characteristic.

Dr. Crippen brought up a good point: If the 'Iron' Chancellor gives a free vote, the act will pass. It won't pass as successfully, but there are enough sensible people in the House of Sauce to get it through. Ontop of that, over 60% of the population of the UK support the idea. So why not?

You can't please all of the people all of the time. It looks like GB is going to die trying.




* Mental note: Buy Private Eye for this fornight.