It Gets Better/Rights of the Silent Majority: Marriage Vows and You

The FAMiLY LEADER recently released it’s presidential candidate pledge to defend marriage. It’s purpose is to record the personal convictions of each presidential candidate regarding marriage. Only those who agree to “defend marriage” may be endorsed by this group.

The wording is to protect the judeo-christian idea of marriage and fuck over everyone else, the agreement is barbaric and actually goes back into the past to strike at the simple rights of women. This is not a set of rules that defends marriage. This is a set of rules that disenfranchises everyone but straight judeo-christian men.

And Michelle Bachmann in her infinite ability to prove to us that she isn’t a feminist has signed it. This alone should raise warning signs.

Let’s delve further into it’s depths to learn about what Michelle now stands for.

“Presidential Candidates who sign the Marriage Vow will sign off on support of personal fidelity to his/her spouse, appointing faithful constitutionalists as judges, opposition to any redefinition of marriage, and prompt reform of uneconomic and anti-marriage aspects of welfare policy, tax policy, and divorce law. The Marriage Vow also outlines support for the legal advocacy of the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA), humane efforts to protect women and children, rejection of anti-women Sharia Islam, safeguards of all married and unmarried US military personnel, and commitment to downsizing government and the burden upon American families.”

It’s a good summary. It specifically points out that it’s doing this for the women and children. After all women have to be married to happy right? And they say they wish for faithful constitutionalists. Will they reverse the freedom of black people? The rights of women? The emancipation proclamation?

Ah but let’s remember that they wish to bring in faithful constitutionalists. This bit is important (and highly embarrassing since it’s a brit showing off his knowledge of american law which is utterly butterly daft.)

The actual document begins with this -

“Faithful monogamy is at the very heart of a designed and purposeful order – as conveyed by the Jewish and Christian scripture, by Classical Philosophers, Natural Law and by the American Founders – Upon which our concepts of creator – endowed human rights, racial justice and gender equality all depend.”

There are many flaws with this section. For starters if you are a constitutional purist then you are sworn to remember that the US constitution then separation of religion and state is entombed in it at a very early stage. Thus voiding the judeo-christian viewpoint of this and the whole designed and purposeful order. Classical philosophers often were bigamists or practiced homosexuality themselves. The american founders were also deists who didn’t believe in gender equality or racial justice on accounts that the american constitution did not allow women any rights to vote until much later and treated black people as inferior to white in so much as they were kept as fucking slaves. The American Founders themselves had black people as slaves. Property. They had no goddamn clue about modern rights, racial justice or gender equality. And neither does this document as we delve deeply.

Natural Law are the laws of nature where rape, infidelity and incest are common enough. We aren’t followers of natural law because pretty much everything humans have done since we first took our earliest steps on this long road to being awesome has been “unnatural” as we have not relied on natural process as much as our brains to enforce our development. The fact is that you wear pants which is unnatural. The fact is that unlike the birds my method of flight is to place myself in a metal tube and compress air by the mechanical contrivance of a jet engine and hurl myself at 500 MPH along the sky flicking the Vs at gravity and stupid birds while sipping red wine and watching a movie. And nature is filled with polygamy and homosexuality.

“Enduring marital fidelity between one man and one woman protects innocent children, vulnerable women, the rights of fathers, the stability of families and the liberties of all Americans under our republican form of government. Our exceptional and free society simply cannot endure with the transmission of personal virtue from one generation to the next, by means of nurturing, nuclear families comprised of sexually-faithful husbands and wives, fathers and mothers. We acknowledge and regret the widespread hypocrisy of many who defend marriage yet turn a blind eye toward the epidemic of infidelity and the anaemic condition of marriages in their own community. Unmistakably the Institution of Marriage is in great crisis.”

What we see here is a “why won’t you think of the children?” argument. Children are fine in happy homes, happy homes require happy parents. If parents aren’t happy with each other then the home is not happy and the children suffer. If splitting up makes parents happy then the children are happy. Do you think kids don’t notice the lies and misery of their parents? They are children not goldfish. If your dog can tell when you are upset then they can.

Vulnerable women are generally vulnerable because of the bloody husband. Majority of vulnerable women are those in the sex trade (we shall see about that later), the poor (bad advice! What’s the difference between sex for money and sex for a comfortable life?) or the chronic abuse cases. Preventing them from leaving their husbands does not help chronic abuse cases. And how is reducing the liberties of gay people and women supposed to be increasing liberty for all?

The USA is not an exceptional nor is it a free society. It is one of many other societies. Personal virtue is acquired not by adherence to a book but by the acquisition of wisdom and experience to use that. It isn’t innate. A child is virtuous only by the idea of innocence, that the child’s lack of knowledge is endearing. It isn’t it’s endearing because a child is harmless. The gap of knowledge must be filled. Virtue is the application of knowledge to do things that are appropriate. Not to follow faith blindly. The average american is no different from the average person in the rest of the developed world.

“Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two parent household than was an African American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American president.”

Are these clowns suggesting that black people were better off as fucking slaves? Property? Chattel? Do you guys even know how to make a real argument?  The child being born to two slaves is many orders of worse of than a child born to practically anyone else. You would have to be Josef Fritzl to make that child’s life worse than slavery.

“The out of wedlock birth rate is 41% of white people and 70% of black parents – a prime sociological indicator for poverty, pathology and prison regardless of race and ethnicity”.

 Really? Being born to single parents is the cause for poverty not being born to poor people? Bloody hell! We are obviously going about it wrong. Ecoute bien s’il vous plait (Listen very carefully for I shall say this only once!) correlation does not imply causation. Poor people may just be less likely to marry because they don’t see the bloody point of it.

Pathology? You mean single people are
more likely to bloody die? No they aren’t poor people are in your nation because they don’t have access to proper healthcare. The big issue is that people are poor, not that they aren’t married. That’s like saying that the biggest issue of someone dying of thirst is that he isn’t baptised.

“About 1 million children suffer through divorce each year – the outcome of about half of first marriages and 60 percent of remarriages, disproportionately affecting economically vulnerable families”.

Why are the children suffering? Surely living in a unhappy home is equally suffering? Would you rather a million children suffered in unhappy homes than made a clean break out of it? Sometimes loves in a marriage goes away. Sometimes it doesn’t work out. Should we punish both parties for all time?

And I think children are not selfish little dicks who only care about their own happiness. If mum and dad are happier apart and with new lovers then the kids may not understand why dad had to go away… but they will understand that their parents are happier and that leads to them being happy.

“The tax-payer borne social costs of family fragmentation exceeds $112 billion a year, especially when all the costs to the justice system are recognised.”

The research is by the incredibly biased source of the Institute for American Values. I would place that figure under contention. A quick question though. How many tax dollars are lost in tax breaks for highly unconstitutional marriage which is only of the Judeo Christian model?

And I am highly skeptical of this cost. Majority of divorce is by mediation rather than court and shouldn’t cost this much.

“Social protection for women and children have been evaporating as we collectively debased the currency of marriage. This debasement continues as a function of adultery, quickie divorce, physical and verbal spousal abuse, non comittal co-habitation, exemplary infidelity and unwed cheating among celebrities, anti scientific bias which holds in the absence of empirical proof than non heterosexual inclinations are genetically determined, irresistible and akin to innate traits like race, gender and eye colour as well as anti-scientific bias which holds, against all empiricle evidence, that homosexual behaviour and sexual promiscuity in general optimises individuals or public health”

Social protection for women and children have been on the increasing. You touch a child and you get to go to jail for child abuse. Women’s empowerment has been marching on despite the efforts of these people. Women don’t need social protection like this. This is akin to the purdah or the burkha. It protects women from “real abuse” by lumping that in with other non abusive things. That’s like saying we will prosecute rape on women harshly and then proceeding to ban them from driving cars.

Adultery is no different from cheating, it is an act of thoughtlessness and one that harms those we love by the betrayal of trust and love. It’s not some mythical sin that tarnishes the soul, it is just a thoughtless move. Quickie Divorce is actually what sane people call “no fault divorce”. The ability to sit together and mediate a painless divorce is one of the best things that has happened to women and men. If one person is miserable under the old system they had no recourse till things became so toxic that they couldn’t even stay in the same room to decide on how to deal with life. Now 95% of divorces are no fault divorce and are settled amicably with both sides being generally happy with the settlements allowing them to move on with their lives rather than be forever yoked to a bad situation until it ends horribly.

Gay people seem to like people of the same gender exclusively. I don’t see why it would be a choice. You could parade a thousand sexy men in front of me and I wouldn’t even bat an eyelid. I don’t see the attraction. I expect gay men would respond the same way to women. Even if it were a choice, it wouldn’t matter one iota about what they did. At it’s heart it is love. Love is just two people realising they are right for each other. Physically and mentally. It isn’t some forbidden thing, it’s just people seeking companionship.

Sexual promiscuity is at the heart of 1970s feminist drive. It is at the heart of the liberalisation of culture regarding women and part of female environment. The idea to realise that a woman can seek pleasure in sex just as a man can. Safe sex is actually better than victorian values. Because victorian values are a sham. You have so many hang ups about sex that boys and girls behave weirdly. Safe sex actually makes the public safer because it is blatantly obvious that loyalty to one person and no contraception doesn’t work. We see this in places like the Philippines where promiscuity still occurs despite “values” with devastating consequences. And no these aren’t threats to public health. You know what’s a threat to public health?

Incomplete medical coverage caused by a privatised healthcare system and non universal healthcare. Things your stance is for.

The list of candidate promises come up next, but we do have to laugh at some of them.

  • Personal fidelity of a spouse is appreciable but what does that have to do with competency to rule a country?
  • Surely respecting the marital bonds of others means accepting that gay people can get married? Their marital bond matters too.
  • Election of constitutionalist judges is a faulty idea. The entire point of the constitution is it is a living document. The original constitution is pro slavery and anti women. Progress is improvement of the ideals of freedom of the 17th century to the modern version.
  • If the institution of marriage is mandated by the judeo christian god then it is illegal to provide government support as it is a religious institution. 
  • Marriage is failing because people get married too early without realising that love is sadly transient. When it exists it is beautiful, two people whose lives and minds interact in an unfathomable way unique to each one. But it eventually can die. Widows and widowers do remarry. Waking up one day and finding out you no longer love the person you are now forever yoked to is a damning thought. We all think we are the love that lasts the ages and even the universe, but most of us fall short. It is better to move on and be happy than to be miserable or worse delusional. 
  • Married people? Well not really. People in relationships tend to have all that because relationships make you happy and happy people live longer and take care yourself better. People in relationships tend to raise kids better simply because there are two parents available to care for the child. Not because there is some mystical properties of marriage.
  • Anti-marriage welfare policy includes alimony, tax breaks for single parents, divorce law and extended “cooling off/second chance” periods. Bollocks. Those are necessary for a modern society and women’s rights. Holy crap do you want abusive husbands to go back to their wives to see if they can “work it out”? Force unhappy people to sit together without mediation for x months before they get divorced and expect them to think about it sensibly? If one partner doesn’t want to be in a relationship then there is no point forcing them to stay in one. No fault divorce is a product of that. 
  • DOMA and the definition of marriage are backwards. My marriage to a woman is not going to be tarnished by sharing the moniker with some gay people. I hope to find the woman of my dreams one day. I work daily for that very day, but I would be a complete arsehole if I declared that others may not experience the love I feel. Gay or Straight or Bi or queer, everyone deserves th
    e chance to love and marry. And I am an atheist, if Judeo/Christian marriage is the norm, then my marriage is not protected. I come from a Hindu culture, I would want a hindu ceremony as well and therefore it wouldn’t be protected.
  • Human trafficking, Sexual Slavery, Coercion into sex are all sad problems. But not ones that can be solved by this stupid rule.
  • Pornography is healthy if it is produced by willing people. I see no problem with people producing videos of their activities for other people. You may not like it but that’s your problem. If I don’t enjoy a church service, then I wouldn’t go to a church. I would declare churches banned. It’s freedom of expression. If prostitution is banned then how will prostitutes put food on their table? Oh wait, by being prostitutes. All you are doing is reducing their protection. You want to protect women? Then legalise prostitution. Fight pimps. Let the girls keep their money instead of funding crime. Keep the girls healthy, let them move out of their slums and away from the abuse and the crack and the disease.
  • Abortion and Infanticide are being used together here. Here is the thing, abortion is part of the whole “sexual health of women”. All pro life movements have done is increase the number of abortions courtesy of reducing education. And abortion actually increases when banned with horrifying effects as women taking matters into their own hands. Innocence isn’t being stolen, it is being replaced with wisdom. 
  • Miltary policy being bandied around is barbaric. It assumes that all gay men want to sleep with straight men. It assumes that all men want to sleep with all women. I love women, they are ace but I have no interest in lesbians or indeed most women. I can work with women without trying to sleep with all of them. And banning women from front line combat is a stab in the back for women who qualify for front line combat. They aren’t delicate flowers, if they are good enough to serve then they are good enough to fight for the roles they qualify in.
  • Sharia Islam isn’t a real thing. And the laws stopping you from spreading your religious nonsense as law protect the rest of the USA from Sharia law. Infact this piece of legislature is more anti-woman and anti-human than you realise.
  • Robust Childbearing does not improve the USA. It is a first world nation. Having more people than jobs doesn’t actually work for Indian and China (the only two nations on this planet with more manpower than the USA.) they are actual detriments to be corrected. China’s brutal policy is having an effect. India’s policy is simply so out of control that it is damaging the environment, infrastructure and economy. Nearly 60% of children are malnourished. Demographically it is not helpful. Economic wise it just means more unemployment because jobs must match people. Strategic? Are you planning to march people into the teeth of guns in human waves? Then wanting a billion americans is a fucking pointless exercise! The USA’s army’s strength is small size and high technology. Actuarial? Security? These points don’t make any sense apart from atrocious policy designed to wreck american economies by overcrowding.
  • Downsizing government means loss of government oversight which protects american families. The biggest cause of bankruptcy in the USA is healthcare costs from the lack of coverage of medical care and the cost of privatised medicine. Not big government. Naturally that defence budget won’t drop nor will the salaries of politicians. And lack of oversight caused the economic downturn. 
  • I am sorry the First Amendment covers pornography (Flynt) and the separation of church and state and actually stands against your definition of marriage as it is solely a biblical world view you are pushing. Not a human one. 
Ultimately it is terrifying that Michelle Bachmann is so blinded that she thinks that signing this protects women or is in any way justice. It hurts women and it hurts marriage.

Marriage isn’t something that cannot defend itself, its a human institution. Giving gay people the same rights as us straight people isn’t the downfall of marriage, it is just the correct thing to do as it is equality.

Women don’t need you to hold their hands. They are fully capable of being equal to men. All this legislature does is remove their rights to a sane relationship. This is a step back, not a step forward. The manifesto indicates the sheer idiocy of the republican stance and how fundamentalism poisons your perception.

When a british man in India can point out a flaw in your own plans and the rules of your own constitution then you have lost perspective. 

Damn! I should have called myself the Hindunator instead!

The Hindunator – Now with all the guns, and all the pomade!

Curses! Is it too late to call myself the Hindunator instead of Avicenna?



Gideon from the blog House of Gideon has called me out in his post. I shall respond to him in dual (here and there). My posts here will carry images to add some colour to the proceedings. 

In fact, mainline “Christianity” is naught but a derivative of a pagan construct, which most of the unwashed assume is at the head of what they deem as typical Christianity and that the so-called “protestant” denominations, ultimately, owe their allegiance to it. If, in fact, Catholicism was, indeed, the representative entity of Christ’s church on Earth, this would be true. Most of what entails Protestantism, today, comes from Catholicism, particularly where the various sacraments, holidays, and day of worship are concerned. These are modeled after pagan rites and deities which are what the people of ancient Rome worshiped, the Catholic Church being the direct progeny of pagan Rome. All religions, including that of the blogger whom I am critiquing, here, are bastardizations of the first and greatest faith system, the one instituted by God before the fall of man, itself falling victim to various and specious alternate interpretations by Satan and evil men. Only the Bible has faithfully recorded this transference, all other sources inadvertently or have conveniently neglected to mention this in their writings.


Nothing to do with that terrible
movie.

It is certainly a human construct in that all religions are constructed by human beings. I however have no religion to criticise. I am an ex-hindu, an atheist. The website says so too. And hey, I am not the one saying “All the Christians are wrong! I know this through my studies of a single bible and not through my grasp of history”.

All of christianity is based out of the Council of Nicea under Emperor Constantine, which included writings from “roman christians” who were influenced by their prior faiths. All the bibles in the world are based out of the Vulgate which was the first bible. Prior to that there were none. This is recorded history.

There was no “fall”. If there was then we would have died out considering the sheer level of inbreeding required post fall that we would have no genetic diversity what so ever. There is no such thing as perfect DNA since we live in a system of evolution. Even without evolutionary pressure then we would have had the genetic variation of two individuals and probably died out as an entire species. Also there was no flood because that would have actually reduced genetic variation to practically nothing again. These are allegories not fact. You aren’t supposed to take them seriously because that’s bloody stupid. 

In response to the “Hindunator” on his claims of Hinduism being older than Christianity, yes, it is older, given the popular interpretation of Christianity, above. However, the faith I follow… the REALreligion of Christ… is the oldest and first, all others being cheap knock-offs of the grand original! You will always be able to ascertain it’s uniqueness and superiority over all other religions by the fact that the Bible religion is the ONLY faith that promises salvation by works NOT attributable to men! All others emphasize what it is that man must do to expiate himself, to justify himself and please whatever contrived deity is involved. Christianity… the true version, not the self-justifying works of Catholicism and the myriad of eastern religions, demands that God’s (Christ’s) authority, ALONE, be recognized as the only redeeming force available. You will not find any other faith with this specific tenet.


The Hindunator shows of his skills
accompanied by his cylon crew…

How is christianity the oldest religion when it is based out of the teachings of Judaism which is younger than Hinduism? Time travel? And the works doctrine is a far more superior doctrine since it requires you to be good. Your theology specifically indicates that there are serial killers in heaven because they “found jesus” while their non christian victims are not. And this is without me even breaking Godwin’s law.

And you fail to understand Karma and Dharma and other faiths. And man doesn’t need to do anything to please a mythical entity. Show me one empirical, repeatable piece of proof for your god. The bible is not proof of your god as then you have just validated every other book of religious belief since they use the same logic. You are pretty much saying “My way is best because I say so! Aren’t I clever?”. It’s like me writing a book that justifies me as the world’s best dancer and when people say that I am terrible I show them that same book as proof that I am
the world’s greatest dance machine! 

The first written evidence of deviation from God’s original plan of self-LESS expiation, comes from the example in Genesis, where Cain went against God’s established rule of offering flesh (signifying the body of His Son) as the only acceptable sacrifice. This, of course, does not condone or promote cannibalism, as some stupid infidels have asserted, it was meant as a teaching aid meant to reinforce the fact that God, Himself, in the form of His Son, would in future pay the penalty for sin which they could not and still remain alive. Only God had the power to lay down His life and take it up again. This effectively skirted Satan’s accusations that the law couldn’t be kept. You see the fallen angel’s spirit in so many infidels, today. They claim God’s law is foolish and non-existent, yet it is the sole originator of all moral values in our society.

How is rejecting a sacrifice of grain a teaching aid to a convoluted set of plans that aren’t even required that culminates in the death of God’s son to absolve mankind of a non crime? That’s bloody idiotic. In order for me to forgive someone, I just have to do that. I don’t have to kill my only son. That’s the weakest part of christian theology considering your god is supposed to be omnipotent and has to dance through this ritual?


Morality predates religion. There were moral societies before christianity. See it’s actually an evolutionary advantage to be moral. Societies with moral behaviour tended to destroy ones that didn’t have any rules. Don’t murder, steal or lie actually make sense. Societies with basic rules such as that are more cohesive and are able to destroy and defeat groups of individuals who steal from each other and kill each other simply because the society without rules is more divided and easier to defeat as they cannot work together.


We can actually see the beginnings of morality by simply observing children at play as they make rules up to facilitate play. The more inclusive the rules the bigger the game. Eventually those games turned into sport with complex rules so as to encourage fair play and inclusiveness of the game to all. If life and death were in the equation, then these rules would be morality.

From this first deviation; Cain offering vegetable produce in place of the required blood-sacrifice, man has sought to do things on his own terms, eventually negating God from life’s equation through the satanic philosophy of evolution. All of the other religions sprang up around the premise that man could justify himself, offering something of himself to ‘appease’ the wrath of his manufactured deities. Paganism has evolved into a subtler but no less destructive version of self-justification, disguised as ‘science’ that absurdly teaches the same old pagan theory that natural forces are responsible for our origins and sustenance. Now, men worship lower animals as their progenitors, and/or other lower biological processes sustained by God, themselves, having or having formerly possessed some overt intelligence to ‘evolve’ later and more advanced versions of themselves, seemingly not satisfied with having attained a workable level of practicality in existence. The whole construct would be laughable, were it not so destructive.

No. All other religions are due to the extended mistake of assuming that there is an entity out there who control our environment and doing certain rituals allows us to produce favourable controls to our environment. It is a product of human ignorance and a lack of understanding. It is a product of fear. 


Paganism has nothing to do with science, science is a product of understanding the natural processes by which the universe functions and providing human beings with the ability to utilise this understanding to produce achievable human progress. Natural forces are responsible for origins and sustenance. Your entire life is directly dependant on the nuclear fusion of the sun’s hydrogen atoms which powers life on earth via photosynthesis. Without that you would die within days of starvation.


And evolution is fact. In each cell there is a DNA code which is the mechanism of inheritance that has been demonstrated empirically. Alterations to the frequency of variations in the genetic code and mutations and recombinations and expressions of the DNA code in different ways are responsible for our complexity. Not magic. You are an ape. A hominid (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) of the great apes with our distant relatives the orangutan, chimpanzee, bonobo and gorilla. There were other hominids but they all went extinct over time. It’s fact in the same way that gravity is a fact. 

The only way to true happiness and fulfillment is not through endless and successive evolutionary transformations, (or lives, as Hinduism teaches… see the connection between it and evolutionary ‘science’?) it is through God, rather, His Son. Christ, incarnate, was and is the God of the Old Testament, it was He Who wrote the law on Mt, Sinai and gave it to Moses to give the world. It was God, Himself, that offered His life for man. Satan, man’s accuser, has done nothing but lead man astray with his specious teachings and promises of self-fulfilled, so-called enlightenment. Like his promise to Eve, his first dupe, of supplying her with forbidden wisdom; likewise, today, men strive to know the mind of God, failing miserably. Christ and His law, alone, stand firm while the best-laid plans of man come to naught.

Hinduism does not see true happiness in endless lives. It sees it in transcendence from this existence. Evolution doesn’t care about happiness, it cares about survival. It’s actually not that nice. Remember for the lion to live the deer must die, for the deer to live the lion must starve.

And happiness and fulfilment is not through your god. That is false happiness. Happiness is whatever you wish it to be. Fulfilment occurs not when you reach some heaven but when you achieve the small happiness that makes up human existence. You stand on the shoulders of small things achieved.

It’s a tragedy, only christians and fools think that acquisition of knowledge is mankind’s original sin. Without knowledge and wisdom you are no different from a chimpanzee. That is the difference between man and animal. Not divinity. The simple drive to achieve k
nowledge and utilise it to improve ourselves.


Fucking biology! How does it work?

Stands firm? I beg to disagree. I can do most of “christ’s miracles” with my technology. I have raised the dead (CPR), brought sight to the blind (glasses) and cured lepers (Dapsone). The green revolution feeds a billion people on this planet today, and I am talking to you using tame lightning on a device made out of sand, metal and the bodies of million year old monsters. The best laid plans of men are frankly titanic compared to your tiny god. The best laid plans of mice are titanic compared to your god.

Yes, your god is small. In scale and scope. We live on a single planet in a huge universe. And you are worried about some heaven when we wish to touch the stars themselves. There is more wonder in a single cell than in your entire bible. You just don’t realise it because you haven’t opened your mind. The only difference between us and the animals is the one thing you refused to use. Your capacity to accumulate knowledge and apply it. There are greater things on earth than in your philosophy.

The world’s population, for the most part, have rejected Christ and the life He brings. Yet, a small minority will overcome and accept, representative of the power of God’s Spirit in the lives of those willing to crucify darling self, such as He did, 2000 years ago. The infidel lives only for himself and those he deems worthy to be around him. He goes to an Godless grave, the same hopeless scenario that he espouses in his heretical worship of nature through evolutionary teaching. Irony incomprehensible!

I may or may not be dressed like Darth Vader.

Hahah! This is where we see the difference. Willing to crucify yourself? Okay. Prove it. I don’t like people who make grandiose claims. I am an atheist and a skeptic. If you say you are willing to crucify yourself then do so.

I go to a Jedi Funeral, not a grave. And to me the grave is the end of all things. Life is it’s own reward, it’s not a race to be run, it’s a walk to be enjoyed. And we do live for others. I learn to save lives for a living. I give people the gift of time to do as they see fit. Anything from a few seconds for a lover to say goodbye to a full life to someone who may have died. I have more value than anything I could gain from believing in any faith.

No magic belief can match upto the feeling you get when you see what you can do with your own human hands and the effective use of knowledge and human ingenuity is what achieved everything we have today. You are so fascinated with the bible that you haven’t realised how far man has rose.

Rights of the Silent majority – We’re not in Kansas Anymore

The people this will hurt are women and the poor. Abortion is a right for a reason, because it’s the woman’s choice to decide and for most women abortions take place in the first two trimesters.

The reason behind that is that most abortions when personal take place in the first trimester. Every woman knows when her menses is late and seeks medical confirmation of the delay. They are educated enough to know what it means and to seek an abortion. Most of these abortions are chemical, designed to cause premature contractions rather than surgical (the abortions that the fundies love whinging about) but curettage can be used.

In the second trimester, most abortions are medical. Done to terminate damaged foetuses whose lives will not be that great post birth. It’s because we can detect most congenital anomalies at the 18th to 20th week. Having a 20 week ceiling means that you are effectively fucking over people whose babies are born defective. It sounds harsh but lest you forget, you aren’t having to pay and care for these babies. The US government does not provide universal healthcare and thus these children are burdens on their family often bankrupting people. The choice should be there to terminate these.

The 20 week ceiling is retarded. It shows a distinct misunderstanding of biology. You may have a brain, you may have a heart but neither are fully developed. And they lack the lungs needed to live. The medical statistics are clear. At 20 weeks 95% of children die EVEN with life support. Of the 5% that live, 95% have severe mental retardation due to hypoxia and require permanent care. To survive and be normal is a rarity in itself and has to do with early lung development (not miracles). At 24 weeks 95% of foetuses survive because of the presence of the lungs. It’s the difference. The ceiling should be 24 weeks.

The mere 2 week gap means that an ultrasound has to be done exactly on the 18th week to screen for anomalies lest the woman run out of time to go get her abortions. It’s a calculated attempt to deny women’s rights under the guise of healthcare improvements.

Get angry, get mad and start making yourselves heard. The better your abortion and sex education facilities the LOWER your abortion rate. No woman likes to have abortions, no doctor likes to give them. I didn’t like the first abortion I assisted in. I felt “bad”, but it’s a necessity. It’s needed and no woman I know would undergo all that for “fun”.

Rights of the Silent majority – Coffee means Sex

I find it surprising that atheists have responded with such vitriol to the women who make up the movement. This event has become a sticking point (and it should be) in the atheist movement.

A lot of people are misogynistic to a point. Men especially are encouraged by modern society to be the whole aggressive pick up artist. While parodied, it’s what the “normal” man is expected to be.

A lot of atheists aren’t well understood. We don’t make up a major proportion of society and there are no such thing as atheist bars and clubs. The heathens must dance with the believers. A lot of us come under the category of nerds and this often comes with the attendant issues of being considered an inferior social class during the formative years of high school. That we lack confidence, the willingness and capability to pick ourselves up after we fall down.

I understand women have it incredibly rough, but spare a thought for the men involved. Society expects us to be the instigator of relationships. We are not bombarded with the idea that we can seduce women with the mere click of our fingers. We are told that IF we cannot seduce a woman with the mere click of our fingers then there is something inherently broken about us. And you start believing it, particularly if you are single and aren’t getting any dates. You can put on a brave face and say “oh, I don’t mind” but you do mind. For the most of us, being single is okay only if you are dating on a regular basis. If you are celibate it gets irritating and you start losing the plot since you are still being bombarded with the “you are broken” message. Either you are weird, or are ugly or that there is something so repulsive about your person that you are single. A lot of us come from such a background. This is incredibly toxic and I feel it is part of the reason why men are misogynistic particularly in this supposedly enlightened period.

So you either go down the route of self pity or you decide that it’s not you who is the problem. It’s the women/men you are trying to attract. That’s the route of a lot of the issues of attacks against feminism and the choice a woman has to say yes or no.

I know what it was like because I went through the whole “single geek” phase of life. I had my first date aged 20 and considered myself ugly due to a forehead scar and losing my hair at a young age. Women probably thought so too because I didn’t have the courage to shave my head when I was younger, nor did I dress with any guiding common sense. I didn’t have the confidence to dance or to talk to girls in bars. Eventually I stopped caring and the confidence came. I still know what it’s like because it has been nearly 2 years since I went on a date (yes I have been celibate for nearly 2 years come august). I have caught myself complaining about how the issue is about the women rather than my own choices coming back to bite me. 

And this ties in with the whole attitude that we have that women aren’t as well represented as men are in the atheist movement. I suggest that it’s due to the domination of men in science until the 70s and 80s when women born after the 60s sexual and feminist revolutions began to appear in universities where they were free to learn their sciences and express the scepticism that favours atheism. Since then their number has grown at least in biology and medicine (the two fields I am familiar with) to the point where there are more women than men in medicine and biology in some courses across the UK. I am not sure about chemistry and physics but I hear the ratio there is pretty poor. As more women come to the sciences more of them are represented in the atheist community.

So while not as sexist as other organisations, we do have a problem in that we were a primarily male demography with a sudden influx of women and this has suddenly caused a friction between the group of men who have a deep seated resentment to women for the faulty reasoning above spilling over into the actual topics that we have in common.

There is a socially acceptable place to flirt. If you fancy someone enough to want to do that then suggest a time and place to do precisely that. If they aren’t interested they aren’t interested. Asking a random stranger up for coffee only works in two places. Pornography and Coffee commercials.