An Atheist Thanksgiving

Thanks for coming.

Can we watch the game? Thanks!

Thanks for helping.

Thanks for buying the turkey.

Thanks for buying the wine.

Thanks for making supper.

Pass the gravy. Thanks.

Thanks for giving your time.

Thanks for giving your money.

Thanks for giving your labor.

Thanks

for giving

thanks.

Explaining Good

Much theological debate swirls around the issue of explaining Evil. If God is Good, why does He allow Evil? Many very fancy answers to this question have been put forward.

Nobody seems to trouble themselves over the question of why Good happens.

Evil appears to require explanation. Good is taken for granted. I regard this not as commentary not on the gods but on humans. We assume good is natural. Good is unforced. It happens continuously, if unopposed by other forces. So it's Evil that requires explanation.

This means that human beings are naturally good. Not, I hasten to add, a positive good in the sense of going around doing Good Deeds; rather, a neutral good, a sort of generalize benign attitude and behavior that does no harm intentionally, though I think most of us think that kindness is also natural.

The view of humans as essentially sinful or even merely flawed or incomplete, is profoundly disturbed. It is a deliberately perverse view of human nature that cannot find anything better to do than to invent some impossible ideal and then blame us for not measuring up to it. Original sin is in this view quite a trick, for it places an unforgivable sin impossibly out of reach or hope of correction. It's as if we all of us raised our children repeatedly blaming them for something they never did and cannot amend.

The atheist is not compelled to explain Evil any more than he is compelled to explain Good. The only task before the atheist is to explain Human. And that is challenge enough.

Still smilin'

The Church Militant

If religion were just religion (i.e., the following of a religio), I'd have no problem with it. For the atheist, it is just another superstition. When a religion evangelizes, it becomes an annoyance. When a religion becomes militant, only then does it become dangerous.

Militant churches are fascinating and can even be thrilling, much the same way an army can be. Fascinating, that is, to someone who studies them; for those who are their victims, they are merely terrifying. Most religions either go through a militant phase or have militant aspects or wings to them, and I argue that it's theology that produces this militancy, and here the behavior of religion is pretty close to the behavior of most any other ideology.

To put it another way, the trouble stems not from the fact that it's a religion but from the fact that human beings have this tendency to ideology and militancy. If they happen to be religious, then those tendencies get expressed in religious terms. If they happen to be areligious, or live in a society in which the secular arm is the stronger, the tendencies get expressed in the secular idioms of philosophy and whatever-ism.

Capitalism, communism, fascism, monarchialism, even the ideology of democracy (my spellcheck complains democratism is not a word), all are in this sense religions. And we see that all of them have their version of the Church Militant. It's no good condemning religions for their religious wars unless we're prepared to condemn these ideologies for their secular wars. All believe their wars are just, and all are hated by their victims.

Which is another way of me saying what I say over and over again. We have to distinguish between not believing in gods (atheism) and condemning religion, either specifically or generally. There's no point in condemning religion because "religion" doesn't exist. There are only people, doing things. What we are condemning is our fellow human beings. I'm fine with that. Only then does one begin to consider how matters might be amended.

Or, to put it more succinctly: hate the sinner, not the sin. ;-)

Postscript:

Okay, this is funny as hell. I posted the above and Blogger came back with a Google ad . . . for Scientology!

Do You Know Jesus?

(hit it, maestro)

If you knew Jesus

Like I know Jesus

Oy, oy, oy what a guuuy!

WWJD

What would Jesus do?

Why, he'd just die, wouldn't he?

Tribute to Transcendentalism

Once I lived a worldly life, filled with
Tasks and toys and all earthly joys, and
It was all about me.

One day I felt, despite all of that, I'd somehow lost myself.

So I leaped off the corporate ladder;
I conceded the race to the rats
And landed in strange fields.

I saw that it is a crime to eat other creatures, and became a vegan,
And was happier for it.
I rejected violence, became a pacifist,
Saw the futility and falsity of politics,
Turned away from the world,
And was the happier for it.

I gave away my toys and cars,
Said farewell to family and friends and my dog,
Joined an ashram, living by meditation and donation,
And was happier for it.

Now, I spend each day in contented contemplation,
Aiming ever for ego-obliteration,
Living in the moment
Peaceful and resolved,
Because at long last,
It's only about me.

Atheism is for Adults Only

When I was twelve I announced to my parents that I was an atheist. The informed me that I could not be an atheist as I was too young to make such a decision.

At the time, the statement struck me as outrageous, without knowing why. I think it was just a very young man's reaction to being told he wasn't supposed to believe what he believed. Later, I realized it was simply because my declaration scandalized my parents and that this was merely what they said out of shock and surprise.

But all these years later the incident comes back to me and makes me think that most profound of human thoughts: *huh*.

Ain't it odd, that whether Muslim or Hindu or Jew or Christian, you can be a child and be a believer. You can be a toddler -- you can be born a Hindu or a Christian or a Muslim or a Jew.

But it takes a grown-up to be an atheist.

*huh*

The Plant Wizard

I'm reading, and really enjoying, "The 42nd Parallel" by John Dos Passos. In it, among many treasures, is this poem, which I reproduce here. Seems like the right place for it.

Luther Burbank was born in a brick farmhouse in Lancaster Mass
he walked round the woods one winter
crunching through the shinycrusted snow
stumbled into a little dell where a warm spring was
and found the grass green and the weeds sprouting
and skunk cabbage pushing up a potent thumb,
He went home and sat by the stove and read Darwin
Struggle for Existence Origin of Species Natural
Selection that wasn't what they taught in church,
so Luther Burbank ceased to believe moved to Lunenburg,
found a seedball in a potato plant
sowed the seed and cashed in on Mr. Darwin's Natural Selection
on Spencer and Huxley
with the Burbank Potato.

Young man go west;
Luther Burbank went to Santa Rosa
full of his dreams of green grass in winter ever-
blooming flowers ever-
bearing berries; Luther Burbank
could cash in on Natural Selection Luther Burbank
carried his apocalyptic dream of green grass in winter
and seedless berries and stoneless plums and thornless roses brambles cactus -
winters were bleak in that bleak
brick farmhouse in bleak Massachusetts -
out to sunny Santa Rosa;
and he was a sunny old man
where roses bloomed all year
everblooming everbearing
hybrids.

America was hybrid
America should cash in on Natural Selection.
He was an infidel he believed in Darwin and Natural
Selection and the influence of the mighty dead
and a good firm shipper's fruit
suitable for canning.
He was one of the grand old men until the churches
and the congregations
got wind that he was an infidel and believed
in Darwin.
Luther Burbank had never a thought of evil,
selecting improved hybrids for America
those sunny years in Santa Rosa.
But he brushed down a wasp's nest that time;
he wouldn't give up Darwin and Natural Selection
and they stung him and he died
puzzled.
They buried him under a cedartree.
His favorite photograph
was of a little tot
standing beside a bed of hybrid
everblooming double Shasta daisies
with never a thought of evil
And Mount Shasta
in the background, used to be a volcano
but they don't have volcanos
any more.

Buddhism blows

There is in the West a sort of intellectual fad of long standing that presents Buddhism as better in one way or another than Christianity. Part of the reason is easy to understand: you don't get many Buddhist crusades or Buddhist jihads or that sort of thing. Pacifism is a core value. Who can hate that, right?

Well, I can. I've many reasons but let's deal with just two. Buddhism is an aristocrat's religion, and it's fundamentally anti-human. To be fair, most religions are the latter, but it's not a statement you're likely to hear much directed at this particular religion.

First, it's always bothered me that Buddhism was founded by the son of a prince. Most religions are merely bundles of tribal customs and never get beyond that. We used to dismiss those as superstitions. Today we're more magnanimous in our language but also less precise. There really is a difference between pagan animalism and a true religion. Topic for another post.

But among the real religions, if you will grant me the point for now, they all have humble origins. Moses was the son of a slave. Jesus was the son of a carpenter. Muhammad was the nephew of a shepherd (his daddy died when he was a kid and he was raised by his uncle). And then we have the son of a prince. So, right away, it gets my populist blood up.

This born-better-than-you person grows up sheltered then has his epiphany: golly, there are poor folk in the world. This causes him to re-evaluate himself and off he goes to find something more meaningful than silk pillows. Bully for him, I say, but this ain't a religion. At best it's a philosophy.

What turned it into a religion? Monks. And monks are parasites. Now, I like to watch a good shaolin ass-kickin' as well as the next guy, and monks to plenty of good work, no doubt about it. But the plain fact, figured out with clear eyes and in plain language by the Protestant reformers of the 16thc, is that monks are parasites. They don't exist without massive dedicated wealth. Wealth that would be better directed to the people. Because the wealth gets diverted *from* the people, these monks have time to sit around all day and develop a nice little philosophy into a full-blown religion with its requisite rites and structures that further divert the precious resources of a society. Piffle.

But all that we can lay to one side as a manifestation of Skip's social prejudices more than a true atheistic stance. It's a fair cop; I just hadda get it off my chest.

The other criticism is more serious. Buddhism did indeed develop into a sophisticated religion. What's not to like about it? The same thing not to like about most religions: their eschatology and their anthropology. They have a deeply flawed view of the human condition.

What is the ultimate aim of the Buddhist? To gain, or at least to seek, nirvana. And what is that? It's the dissolution of the self into the godhead.

How sick is that? The goal of a human is to become un-human. It's staggering that anyone would even begin to think this is a peachy idea. But we are taught in a thousand ways to despise the human condition and to believe that happiness can lie only outside our grasp (Alexander Pope here intentionally invoked). Every true religion teaches this, but Buddhism goes further than any of the others. It's not just the body that's annihilated, it's the will, the sense of self, all shred and echo of anything human, all of it must be suppressed, stripped away, burned up, lost forever. And this is supposed to be some sort of triumph.

Hey Buddhists, I have a news flash for you. I had friends who lost the LSD lottery and they achieved a complete loss of self right here on Earth. It's no great shakes. It's actually surprisingly easy to obliterate the self.

So. Buddhism blows, Ted. Blows most intensely, Bill. Stay away from it. It's poison. I've got a better alternative.

Stay here. Be you. Live long and prosper.

And keep smilin'

Atheist Ethics

You heard it said often that the fact the Golden Rule can be found in many religions is a proof both of its inherent truth and of its divine origin.

Nonsense. That fact that many religions have more or less the same moral code is proof of the code's human origin. All religions were invented by humans; therefore, their moral codes are going to be roughly the same.

Atheist ethics are therefore very similar to religious ethics--because they're all merely human ethics. Do (or don't do) unto others. Turn the other cheek. Be decent and neighborly. Don't steal or lie or murder.

Religions make a big deal out of these moral codes. To which the atheist replies: well, duh.

Of course we should be decent to one another, because we're all we've got. To harm others is ultimately only to harm ourselves. We need to behave ourselves not in hopes of some greater existence in the next life, but because this life is the only one we get and you ought not piss in your own nest.

It was easier to believe in god-stuff in earlier centuries in part because there was no real understanding that we are all in the same boat. Rather, people thought in terms of us and them: aristocrats and commoners, tribe and foreigner, saved and damned, this life and next life. It's much harder to maintain that myth now.

I picture religion as a log floating in a lake. For millenia we've clung to that log for fear of drowning. The atheist says, hey look, we can swim! Let's go see what we can find!

Smilin' all the way.

Foxhole faith

There are no atheists in foxholes. So goes the old saying, and I do hesitate a bit to disagree with Ernie Pyle, but I must insist.

Of course there are atheists in foxholes. One at least, right? Possibly two? And anyway, just because someone yells Oh God while being shelled doesn't exactly make them religious. It makes them scared.

The thing I wonder is: if the person in the foxhole is, say, Chinese, does the putative atheist suddenly convert to Confucianism? To Buddhism? If a Bangladeshi does he become a Muslim?

Or does this whole "aw shit I'm gonna die, God help me" thing only operate for Christians? Or is it only the Christian God who proffers some hope of saving my sorry ass? All other gods let me buy the farm?

Chicken

The true atheist is one who, when the time comes, doesn't chicken out.

Be Better than God

Live in the moment. Know your limitations as well as your strengths. Live and let live. ... be better than God.
Don't be angry or judgmental. Don't take credit for stuff you didn't do. Don't give something knowing you'll get it back and then pretend it was some big sacrifice. Don't be preachy. ... don't do as God does.
Be able to be surprised. Take delight in life even with its flaws. Be skeptical. ... be better than God.
Don't hold grudges. Don't make unrealistic rules and expect other people to follow them. Don't pull cheap stunts at dinner. ... don't do as God does.
Be humble. Be compassionate. Be patient. Be ... oh what's the word I'm looking for ... humane.


Still smilin'

Superbowl Sunday

It's the truest of American religious holidays. It's the anti-Easter, the one Sunday when the fewest people show up in the Christian churches.

I, personally, will be worshipping at the 1080i of my choice, where we will all partake in the communal Bowl's Supper, down communion wafers till we puke, and slam ... well, I have to admit it's mostly going to be coffee and juice. It's my one complaint about Superbowl Sunday: I have to be sober enough to drive home. Puts rather a damper on what otherwise could be a lively fourth quarter.

Anyway, even the football atheists lurk around the edges, peering in through the window, as it were, if for no other reason than to try from time to time to make sense of the mysteries. There we rise and sit and even kneel with the rhythmic regularity of Catholics. There we push aside all worldly concerns with the rigor of a Calvinist. There we strive to become one with the game, interpreting the signs, arguing fruitlessly with the high priests. If only miracles had instant replay and reviews ordered from the booth in the last two minutes.

In the end, some are saved while others are damned, and truly there's no sense in the fate of either. And, truly, Monday comes around and we're all still here and life goes on.

Still smilin'

God Bless America, and then call it a day

You hear it everywhere. It's on bumper stickers. It's in presidential inaugurations. It gets spoken like a cheer: Go, Yankees! God Bless America! Yay!

I got a question, here.

Shouldn't He have done it by now?

I mean, why we gotta keep askin'?

I mean, we ask God: hey, bless America. Then God does it. End of story, right?

You'd think.

Many claim God has already done it. America is so blessed, they say.

Fine and dandy! Maybe we should all give ol' God a break. You figure he gets irritated, we keep askin' him to do what he already done did?

See, it makes sense to have God bless a meal. The food gets blessed and then you eat it and then it's gone. New meal, new blessing.

When we ask God to bless a marriage, we don't have to keep asking for that one, do we? No! One and done. Makes sense. Now, blessing a sneeze, that makes no sense at all, but the religious can have a gimme on that.

Blessing the country, though ... I'm sorry, I have to call that one out. My favorites are the bumper stickers and the stitched wall plaques and the like. These are permanent appeals. It's like a little kid: Mom, Mom, Mom, Mom, Mom, Mom.... Sheesh, give it a rest.

The only thing I can figure is that God blessings are a sort of lottery. You can't win unless you play. So, everybody keeps asking God to bless the USA, and maybe somebody gets lucky and the blessing takes. And all those people who say the country is already blessed are just blowing smoke.

I dunno. Sometimes, these religious types are just plain loopy.

-= Skip =-
still smilin'

God-free for 45 years

I declared when I was twelve, and it still feels fine.

Told my parents: I'm an atheist. To which my father replied "no you're not" and that was the end of that discussion. I couldn't figure out how I could not be something I was. Being an atheist is as much a spiritual leap (if there were such a thing) as being any flavor of religious convert. It's not an opinion; it's a predicate of existence.

It was more, or perhaps less, than that as well. It was more a recognition that the whole business of religion was a song, and I was tone-deaf. I simply couldn't catch the rhythm, couldn't carry the melody. I couldn't even hear the choir. Some years later, I was told that all I had to do was "open my heart" as the phrase went, and God would enter. I gave that a try, as best I could. Felt bloody silly. Felt, indeed, like I was talking to the floor having to pretend it would suddenly make fried eggs. I soon stopped trying to please the people around my by playing their reindeer games.

So, merrily I roll along.

Still smilin'

God hath said in his heart: there is no fool

A very smart man once told me that God was necessary because without God there was no moral order to the universe. That without religion, more specifically, there was no basis on which to create or from which to derive a moral order.

Right-o, it's a fair cop. And it used to worry me some little. Having thrown out the baby Jesus with the holy bath water, I was faced with the dreary prospect of having to invent my own philosophy. Yerg. I'd rather just play my guitar.

And then, a few years ago, I decided that this wasn't a weakness or flaw in atheism, it was a virtue. Yes, we all have to decide what is right for ourselves.

And yes, this means that some of us--oh, why pretend: many of us!--will create systems that are self-serving at best, transient and inconsistent no doubt, and sometimes are downright wicked. That's what we'd do, all right. And have to live with the consequences, too.

And I realized: I don't really have a problem with that. I welcome it. That task, of creating Right and Wrong, of inventing Truth, is quintessentially human. Forget homo erectus and homo sapiens, forget even homo ludens. The anthropologists keep showing us we ain't all that special.
But one thing we clearly do that no other species does is seek Truth.

And (my last misuse of a postpositive conjunction for this post, I promise) check it out: this is exactly, is precisely, is totally what religion takes from us. We are not allowed to seek Truth; rather, it's delivered to us, like the mail. It's revealed to us, like a flasher in the park. Oh, we're encouraged to seek God, but we're either told it's ultimately impossible, or that it's ridiculously easy and all we need is to open our heart (not to be confused with open heart surgery). Either way, it is not an act of construction or creation. It's an act of reception, of submission.

Later for that. I can't think of one good or even not so good reason why my species should surrender its most vital and distinctive activity on the off-chance that there's some grouchy deity who might take offense if we stop paying attention to him in order to try to figure out ourselves. In the words of the sage: meh.

Smile on.

What I Want in a President

Lots of things, but right now on my mind is the so-called war on terror. I've listened to all the candidates and none of them are saying what I want to hear. This is what I want to hear.

There is no war on terror. There never was a war on terror.

There is no terror, for we refuse to be terrorized. I'm sick of listening to people tell us how the most important thing is to make Americans safe.

No it isn't. To say this is to undermine the most fundamental core of our nation. The most important thing for Americans is freedom. It was the founding principle of our nation, the ideal that has guided all our best work.

I propose we restore the freedoms that have recently been undermined by the current administration. These freedoms are worth the risk of an attack. If they aren't worth the risk of a few hundred--or even a few thousand--deaths, then what do we say to those who have laid down their lives for such freedoms in past generations? Are we such cowards, that we would throw away such prizes merely because we were frightened?

I choose not to believe America is a nation of cowards. Those who attack us count heavily on us being cowards, being afraid to make serious sacrifices. They are banking that we are willing only to send our soldiers out to risk death, but that we ourselves are not willing to risk even discomfort. If they are right then we are already lost.

Once our freedoms are restored, once we have proudly and fiercely proclaimed our commitment to justice, liberty, and the brotherhood of peoples, then we can go forward. Not without trepidation, for our enemies have sworn to hurt us.

Fine. Take your best shot. We won't even pretend we are not afraid, for we have seen the horrors you are willing to inflict.

But we are not cowed. We will not be swayed. We will not yield a single inch. And we will continue to hunt you, and you will be destroyed. For, the plain fact is, we are much bigger than you. There are always more decent people in the world than wicked people. Bullies can always win temporary victories, mainly because decent folk have better things to do than to deal with your type. But that doesn't mean we'll give you free rein and it doesn't mean you can go on bullying forever.

Finally, I issue a call to the people of other nations: it's time for you to put a stop to this. America cannot, for the people doing this are not Americans. They are your own people, and they get away with this because you approve of what they do. It's time to stop this.

I do not believe your protestations of innocence, your assertions that these are mad dogs perverting your principles. If that's the case, then rat them out. Turn them in. You know who they are--you're the ones protecting them, praising them, tolerating them. From the first day of my presidency we will begin cutting support to your nation until you start giving them up. Give us bank accounts, addresses, cell phones, rumors, all of it.

Until I see that, I can only assume that you are in sympathy with those who would harm us. Well, no more of that.

In return, I recall our troops. I recall also our planes and ships, including the ones you're using. You get not another fighter, no electronic surveillance. If you are going to protect these people, you aren't going to use our equipment or our money to do it. We will be generous to those who help in this; those who do not will be cut out of the community of nations.

So, that's it. There are no terrorists if we are not terrorized. There are only criminals, who need to be caught and punished. Meanwhile, we will go about our business as we have always done. We will not let criminals steal our freedom. And we will mobilize the world to flush out these criminals, and we will stop invading countries in the deluded belief that this solves crime.

One more item. I acknowledge that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, unjustified, and tragic. We will take one-third of the money that we have budgeted to spend in Iraq next year and put it in a reparations fund. We will begin sending money to Iraq with the stipulation that it can be used only for rebuilding and none for arms. If we see the money is being stolen or used to help in civil war, we will cut off funding. But if Iraqis are willing, then we are willing to own up to the damage we have done and will try to provide what restitution money can provide.


There you have it. That's what I want to hear from a presidential candidate. It's not likely I'm going to hear this, though. I don't think we're a nation of cowards, but I do think we have managed to paint ourselves into a corner in which there is no avenue for showing courage.

Some days, it's hard to keep smilin'.

On Fundamentalism

The Smiling Atheist

(wandering back after a long hiatus)

I respect fundamentalists, I truly do, and of all religions. IMO, they're the only ones who deserve the appellation "religious" (look up the Latin root).

I mean, if there really is a god -- any old god, but especially the Lone Diety type -- then we all are really and truly and genuinely insane if we don't just drop down on our knees and pray, and remain in that position until we drop.

What could possibly be more important than God's work? What could possibly matter more than immortal souls? Why worry about any law other than God's law? Why spend any of our time on anything at all other than trying to discern and follow the divine plan (I hope God doesn't use MS Project...)?

Nothing. Not a damned thing, you should pardon the expression. Everything and anything that isn't God-related pales to insignificance. It's almost criminal to think of spending one's time at anything other than prayer and meditation. All religions acknowledge this when they venerate the monk and the hermit above all other humans.

By similar logic, any religion or person who claims religiosity short of that utter dedication is a fool or a liar. It's like working for world peace by sending in a donation once a year. It's like going to school part time and calling one's self a scholar. It's like claiming you're in love but you're not ready for a full-time commitment.

And the worst of the worst are the ones who think they can treat religion like an a la cart menu. I'll take four commandments, three precepts and ritual please, hold the sacraments. It's religion as absurdist theater.

No, give me that old-timey religion, complete with Real Presence and daily miracles and I'll have my fire with brimstone if you please. These folks are serious. These folks have faith--that sort of unblinking, unthinking brain process that drives people to sainthood and suicide bombs in equal measure. It ain't nothin' to mess around with.

The trouble with the a la cart crowd is that they provide cover. They make religion look respectable, even friendly. With them, religion seems safe, fun! What it is, of course, is utterly trivial, a sort of Elks Lodge with deity, or a mere social convention. They get most of the air time, most of the real estate, most of the attention, so the fundamentalists get portrayed as aberrations.

Fundamentalism is not an aberration of religion. Fundamentalism is the destination of religion. It's present in every religion and is its natural tendency in the same way that war is the natural tendency of every society, or totalitarianism the ultimate end of every government.

So people are lulled into thinking religion is okay. Religion isn't okay. It's never okay. If it's merely "okay", then it isn't religion. And because we're lulled into thinking of religion as vaguely (or explicitly) benign, it becomes really difficult to formulate a socially compelling critique of religion. After all, there are all those very nice people going to church. It's difficult to paint them as the enemy of much of anything.

Meanwhile, the really dangerous elements are out there. From time to time they strike. From time to time they do astonishing good, too, be it said.

But none of that matters, because this isn't about whether religion is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing. Religion is merely a Silly Thing. Like war and totalitarianism, it's a thing we need to grow out of. It's old skin, and fundamentalism is where it sticks most tightly.

What to do?

Step One: don't feed the troll.

Don't argue with them. Don't get all hysterical when they blow something up or kill someone. Don't get all doe-eyed when they help in relief efforts or save the children. If we ignore them, they won't go away, but if we engage with them they will certainly prosper.

Don't feed the troll.

(and keep smilin')

Jesus had it easy

So, all right, most of these posts are going to be about Christianity because that's the religion I know best. I may speak to other religions now and again, but this one is easy not only because I know it well but also because it's so well thought-out and documented. Lots to work with.

One of the core elements of Christianity is the suffering Christ. Christ died for your sins. That's a central message. Because Christ died for our sins . . . depending on which flavor of Christianity you choose, that gets you anything from an all but confirmed seat on the train to Jordan, or gets you not much at all because all the seating is pre-assigned.

The sacrifice of Christ, however, has never much impressed me. Jesus was God. Knew he was God. He *knew* he wasn't really dying. He *knew* he was going to rise from the dead and ascend to Heaven. The suffering was real (except in certain ancient heresies), but he knew the suffering would end and he'd be back up in greener pastures.

Now, I ask you, who made the bigger sacrifice: the god-made-man who knew he was going to be fine, or the poor chump martyr who knew only that he was going to die and be dead and *maybe* be resurrected and go the Heaven?

Personally, I have much more respect for any American solider who marched into harm's way to protect his homeland and certain ideals that probably weren't all that clear in his mind to begin with. I am much more humbled by the revolutionary who throws himself against tyranny on the incredibly slim chance that he might make a difference.

Now *that's* somebody who died for me. *That's* somebody who inspires awe and respect. The Jesus thing is right up there with Zeus turning into a swan. He was a god first and he knew he would be a god afterward. The swan thing was just a diversion. No real sacrifice because nothing was sacrificed.

Hey, if a god wants to offer up a genuine sacrifice, then go away and never come back. Now that would be something, wouldn't it? A god who disappears? That would definitely be divine sacrifice.

But don't come down for what amounts to a weekend slumming and expect me to get all choked up about it. There are real people suffering real consequences and until you can match that, getouttatown.

-= Skip =-
still smilin'