What (if anything) do you feel “guilty” about?

Here’s a (seemingly) prosaic example of why I cannot bring myself to give a fuck about most people’s (supposed) ‘beliefs”:


Specifically, I have never felt “guilty” about the fact that I tend to transgress “Kashrut” dietary superstitions on a regular basic.

Why?  because that particular matrix of superstitions and taboos wasn’t perpetrated on me, during  the parts of “childhood” where I would have been ignorant/vulnerable/imitative enough to (possibly) “buy into” them – and be psychologically crippled, as a result.

Now, please notice something:

Fundie “Christians” typically love them some ham-hocks/pulled pork, etc.

But, here’s the thing: they excuse their antics (rampant violation of “kashrut” dietary laws) on the grounds that Jesus supposedly “Fulfilled” the OT “laws” – so they don’t have to give a shit about actually complying with those taboos/superstitions anymore.

This is convenient, and fits right into what you’d expect if a thug like Constantine the “great” were actively attempting to force a specific version of “Christianity” down the Empire’s collective throats at sword-point.

The “gimmick” behind “historical” Christianity (IE: everything post-Constantine) has always been the same: How do you trick a population into DESTROYING almost everything about their existing culture, and/or permitting your “clergy” to do so – at sword-point, no less?

The “gimmick” has always been the same: co-opt whatever tidbits of the existing culture could be force-fit into “Christianity” -while soundly demonizing everything else about the “pagan” past.

So, for example:

the “pagan” Solstice festival (“Yule”) was hijacked and garbled (almost) beyond recognition – resulting in what we today call “Christmas”.

This is a double-win for “Christians”, in that it it will always remain possible for any given variant of “Christians” to continue demonizing even these garbled/attenuated fragments of the “pagan” past – typically, in order to “prove” (to their own victims/subjects) that some other variant of “Christianity” is nothing more than a “Satanic Counterfeit”/tainted by “paganism” -etc.


In other words; “Christianity” originated the tactic illustrated in George Orwell’s book Nineteen-Eighty-Four:  periodically, those in control of some variant of “Christianity” find it expedient to declare (“spiritual” – or physical) war against some other variant(s) of “christianity.

The goal of such “spiritual warfare” is typically not about the overthrow of any given “satanic counterfeit”.  What it is about, is inculcating FUD – fear, uncertainty and doubt – among their OWN victims (er, I mean “flock”).

So, for example, some “Christian” groups get a significant amount of play out of making their own “flock” feel guilty/terrified about (for example) such heinous “sins” as hunting for Easter eggs.

This kind of thing is really all that any religion (including “Christianity”) has at its disposal – other than outright physical brutality, against “heretics”/”unbelievers”.

It is the only thing which ensures that enough of their “flock” continue to feel utterly horrible about themselves, to the point where they continue to come belly-crawling back, for another dose of the “good news”.

Another cute gimmick is: the seething hatred for anything even resembling reality-based thought:

Remember the “snare for the proud”, thing?


The above-linked “explanation” of how the “Godly” (mal)function explains a lot about why so many of them are still so resistant to what they term “darwinism”: their “sacred” text makes absurd claims about the origin of the Cosmos – which utterly fail to match up with what the actual evidence indicates.  For example, that the Universe was not “created” in 4004 BC, over the course of 6 “literal” (IE: 24-hour) “days”.


Now, I’m not even going to bother going into the whole “irreducible complexity” gimmick from “intelligent design”, for the simple reason that – even if they’re right about that, such a conclusion still fails to lead exclusively to Yahweh.  (At most, such a notion would go a fair way toward supporting the “punctuated equilibrium” model of evolution, and indicate that so-called “macro”-evolution exhibit something akin to “dependency hell”:


Then again, Intelligent Design “theory” inevitably runs up against the question of how exactly a sufficiently complex “creator” could exist at all.  After all, if  the complexity of biological life-forms is genuinely “irreducible”, then the complexity of any sort of “creator”  would also have to be equally “irreducible”, right?

Now, you might (mistakenly) believe that the above would neccesarily require the existence of exactly the sort of “Omni”-deity to which Monotheists typically resort (Ie: “omni”-potent, “Omni”-scient, etc.

The problem with that is: If “mere” biological life is “so complex as to only have been ‘designed” – then so is any possible “Designer”.

Here’s a more “homey” example:

Bioluminescent dogs “designed” by a genetics lab in South Korea:


Now, here’s the thing: if “Ruppy” (or the equivalent) ever achieved sufficient levels of intelligence to wonder about its own origins (and, especially, about the “purpose” behind the fact that some of them have weird fur that glows under ultraviolet light), it would be disregarded as cynicism, verging on blasphemy – to even entertain the idea that their “mysterious gift” of weird fur originated as a science experiment.

There’s the “higher destiny” of Ruppy, right there.

So, no: even ID “theory” doesn’t lead to Yahweh – let alone to the kind of idiocy you get among certain variants of Fundie Protestantism.

Hell, even assuming the possibility of a “religious” interpretation – humans could have been “designed” by the Norse “gods”, explicitly to serve as “cannon-fodder”, for the battle of Ragnarok:


At any rate, I’m familiar with the spectacle of (for example) Mennonite families being “horrified” at the possibility that their children would ever learn anything about dinosaurs – because such knowledge might possibly lead them to question (and -if intelligent enough -reject) the “Young Earth” idiocy.

I’m pretty sure at least some Fundies and suchlike end up feeling “guilty” over their fascination with dinosaurs.




One thought on “What (if anything) do you feel “guilty” about?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s