Good News again, everyone!

This has nothing to do with Futurama (unless, in an oblique way, you feel it is appropriate to tie in to the commentary on one of the DVDs, in which one of the writers says, "we hate religion" in a HHOS sort of way)... So, you ask, what is this good news, the parenthetical caveat, for which, is more verbose than ... eh. I give up.

Bobby Henderson, the Prophet of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, himself, sent me a "personal" email to tell me the Good News. Fron the email:


Fellow Believers,

Our day has finally arrived! The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is at last here. Maybe not inscribed on stone tablets, but it is a book. And maybe not THE Good Book, but at least A Good Book.


Bobby and I go way back (that's an utter lie. We go back to when I asked him for permission to use the Jolly Fish as tattoo flash. His affirmative reply included the remark, "Hahha.. that sounds excellent! Please *please* send me a picture of the tattoo!" then, "Where will the tattoo be located? Or maybe I don't want to know... Don't feel obligated to send pictures if it's on your ass or something - I can live without that." That's when I knew FSMism was the religion for ME! {Monty Python's The Meaning of Life... ? eh? never mind :| }) .. anyway, that's how Bobby got my email address.

Of course, the email goes on and on and on and on... this IS all about religion, you know...

So, aparently, they have it at the Borders near me. As you might imagine, I will be snagging a copy. Once I have read it, I just might post a review here.

Now that I think about it, I suppose I could have simply said:


Hey everybody, the Gospel of The Flying Spaghetti Monster is finally out!

... but that just wouldn't have been me.

Good News, Everyone!

hmmm.... this, it seems, may not be as factual as I'd hoped. sigh. I'm leaving it up for hysterical raisins. -- Ursus 20060323

Oh

my

freaking

lack

of

gods!


Futurama, what just may be the greatest show in the history of television, is (can it be true) being picked up for 26 new episodes. Here are some links.

After the last two posts, thick with heavy seriousness, I thought something a little lighter might be in order.

Whee!

Futurama!

BTW, the semi-official word that I've heard is that Futurama will "return" as 4 direct-to-DVD "features"... we'll see. --Ursus

Again with the atheism...

In radio, particularly with "morning drive-time" shows... y'know, the funny ones, where the show goes by the name of "Steve, Lizzy and Omar", but there's really, like, 30 people on the show... Well, if "Steve" is sick, hung over, or, for some other reason, not coming in, the rest of the folks will cull through the show's "Archives" and put together a "Best Of..." show.

This is a Bare Bear "Best Of..." show. I haven't the time to really put together a winner. Yesterday's blog just took too much out of me (and made me REALLY late for work).

What follows is a "Letter to the Editor" I wrote in response to an article published on September 11, 2005 by The New London Day called "Citizen, Atheist, Patriot" My letter was published 4 days later, terribly pared down. I saved the original "rant" I planned to send in, until I did a word count on it and realized it was WAY over the limit. I wanders a bit, and ... might even repeat itself. Concision is not my long suit.

Here it is. Enjoy!


To whom it may concern:

Regarding your article about the Norwich Atheists, I applaud the courage you displayed in simply printing the article, and, further, positioning it above the fold on the front page.

I was disappointed, however, by the lack of useful information about atheism in the article. Atheism is a woefully misunderstood world view in America, and your article missed a rare opportunity to effort the reversal of that misunderstanding.

Having been an atheist all my adult life (and most of my youth), I can certainly appreciate the lack of acknowledgement, understanding and acceptance of atheism as a world-view with a likelihood of correctness at least as good as that of Christianity, Judaism, Islam or Hinduism.

Having had to face the pervasive and seemingly irreversible encroachment of Christianity into ostensibly secular aspects of public life almost as long as I can remember, I share the frustration of the subjects of your article. Matters such as the "Evolution/Intelligent Design Debate", the "Gay Marriage Debate" and the "Choice/Abortion Debate" show, with stunning clarity, that our local, state, federal governments are incresingly willing to abandon the principles set forth by our founders and fold under the cacaphony of thinly-veiled religious lobbying.

Like all the atheists I have known personally, I have no interest in interfering with others practicing their beliefs, provided they do not infringe my rights, they recognize that I am entitled to that same accomodation, and they recognize that, under the US Constitution, their belief system is no more or less valid than anyone else's in the eyes of the Government.

Like all atheists, I have faced misunderstanding, denial and rejection. One of the most stunning, if subtle, experiences of my life came while I was enlisting in the US Navy. I was filling out one among the myriad forms. It was one of the forms that has to do with what they do with you when/if you die. There was a field of checkboxes on one form, representing a number of Christian, Jewish and Islamic denominations. There were cursory nods to other religions, such as Buddhism, Native/Aboriginal, Hinduism, et cetera. At the end of the list, was a checkbox for "No religious preference", but there was no option for "Atheist". The choice I made in this field would determine what would go on my dogtags, what religious accomodations I might be granted throughout my enlistment and how my remains would be treated in the event of my death. I debated with my recruiter the inaccuracy of this, and ultimately was told that it didn't matter. It did matter. For the next three years, I had to represent myself as something I was not. I was not indifferent. I was, and am now, a deeply-rooted non-believer, and I was incensed.

I also share the view expressed by the subjects of your article, that current administration is not operating with my best interests at heart, or those of the Nation as a whole. George W. Bush (both personally and through his administration and supporters in Congress) is trampling The Bill of Rights with impunity, imposing his religion and ideology (with taxpayer dollars, no less) on the masses of this Nation and, sadly, the world at large, on a scale few in the office he now holds have done before. His "Us or Them" mindset, fermented in his religion, is a tremendous threat to domestic and international peace, civility and progress.

I, too, am an "Atheist, Citizen, Patriot". I am not asking for preferential treatment. I expect that Christians and others will treat me with the same respect they offer to people of other faiths, or that they would hope to be shown. That is the "Golden Rule", is it not? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?

War! Huh! Good god! You all!

I am often disgusted by the way Americans butcher the English language. Sure, it's a living language and it's bound to evolve over time, but people seem encouraged, now, to mutillate the language in the interest of fashion or to further some otherwise-unstated agenda. Some folks are simply not content with having a house; they want a hizzouse. It's not a hizzouse, it's a house. You didn't get a mortage on a hizzouse. The deed doesn't list a hizzouse. You certainly didn't get a hizzouse-owner's insurance policy. This is a comparatively benign example of people missing the point of language.

Language is about communicating ideas. In human culture, there are many kinds of ideas, but they really break down into two major groups: fictional and factual. Fictional ideas are not necessarily communicated with intent to deceive for the purpose of financial or political gain. The novel "Jaws", for example, is a work of fiction. It is marketed as such, and anyone who believes otherwise about it is a fool.

Here is how communication through language works: I have an idea. I want you to have this idea, too, so I use a language to illustrate and illuminate this idea of mine, and if I've done it well and properly, we will both share the same idea. This idea could be factual or fictional. It really doesn't matter, provided either I inform you as to its grounding in reality (at least to the best of my knowledge) or you posess sufficuent knowledge or understanding to make such a determination on your own.

If, on the other hand, I want you to have an idea, an idea which I do not hold as factual, but I wish you to hold it as factual, and I communicate this idea to you using language, in such a way as to cause you to believe I am making factual statements, when, in fact I am not... That is lying.

Here is a concrete example:

Constitutionally, the US Congress is the only body within the United States with the power to declare War on behalf of the United States (US Constitution, Article I, section 8). That is, the United States of America is not in a State of War unless the Congress explicitly declares that a State of War exists between the United States of America and at least one other power. The last time the US Congress actually declared the United States of America to be in a State of War was against Romania, on June 5, 1942. Every use of military force since the end of World War II has been carried out (ostensibly) through the exercise of the President's Article II "War Powers" (and, since 1973, "consistent with" the War Powers Resolution {Public Law 93-148}).

Here's the rub, though: Although Article II of the Constitution does not explicitly limit the President's powers as Commander In Chief to times of actual Declared War, it does say this: "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual
Service of the United States" What, exactly does "actual Service of the United States" mean? The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution has something interesting to say: A Grand Jury Indictment is required to prosecute Capital or otherwise infamous crimes "except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War..." Other than this, Amendment III, and the Article I, Section 8 grant to Congress of the power to declare War, the Constitution is remarkably silent on the topic. It does seem fairly clear to me, though, that Congress has the power to Declare War and the President, in time of (actual Service, a.k.a. .. ) War (as declared by Congress) is the Commander In Chief of the Army and the Navy.

So, with all this under our belts, Let's take a fresh look at George W. Bush and his "War on Terra" (That's how HE says it! I'm not making this stuff up!).

George W. Bush has claimed that we are in a war, and, as such, he is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and, as such, he is free to engage in any surveilance, arrest, detention, interrogation, deportation, rendition, abridgement of Civil Liberties, invasion, imprisonment, execution, application of military force or any other action he sees fit, without Congressional oversight, without Judicial endorsement and without the knowledge of the Citizens of these Unites States. He does all this in the interest of preserving Liberty and Justice.

Right off the bat, "in a war". In his 2006 State of the Union Address, President Bush stated: "Our own generation is in a long war against a determined enemy", without stating who that enemy is. Are we in a War? Has Congress Declared the United States to be in a State of War? Not that I've heard. We are in a conflict.

What is the difference? A nation is at War when it and all of its constituents have commited themselves fully to inflicting a clearly-defined defeat upon a clearly-definded enemy. A Nation is at War when it reorganizes its industry, commerce and even its society to unite in service of the War Effort. This unified National Commitment is codified in a Delaration of War by Congress. One interesting consequence of Declaring War is that once War is Declared, the declaring Nation is bound by the Law of Nations, which, among other things, governs how Wars are conducted.

A conflict is when we send some troops over there, somewhere, to use up some ammo and kill some brown people, but... in a simple conflict, we, as a Nation, are not committed to Defeating an Enemy. Ususally, it's a "peace-keeping" effort, or the troops are there as "advisors" or under the guise of some other hoky policy sleight of hand. The Law of Nations seems to be strangely impotent in this arena, and, as a consequence, Abu Gharib, Guantanimo and other abominations are, aparently, conveniently out of reach from prosecution.

In our current conflict, We, as a Nation, have engaged in Acts of War (lest we forget, we have invaded 2 sovereign nations, toppled their governments and installed pro-American regimes with sympathies toward American oil interests) and, some would argue, have committed War Crimes (Abu Gharib... how many counts of human rights abuse, POW mistreatment, torture, et cetera can you find in this picture? And Abu Gharib is just one of the "indiscressions" that managed to percolate into public view.), but Congress has not Declared the United States to be at War with any other power or entity.

The Bush Administration wears Article II of the Constitution like a fig leaf as it tramples the Bill of Rights. Article II makes no provisions for the neutering of Amendments I, III, IV, V, VI, VIII and IX to the Constitution. Amendments III and IV are the only ones in the Bill of Rights which make any explicit mention of War, with very narrowly limited War-time exceptions to the rights granted. The only Bill of Rights Amendment the Bush Administration hasn't even come close to perturbing is Amendment II. I wonder why that could be.....?

So, State of War? Nope. Article II powers? Doubtful if War is not Declared by Congress, methinks.

Impeachment? Gosh, I hope so! Conviction? I think if any President in the last thirty years has earned a heaping helping of prison time, it's George W. Bush.

George W. Bush (and his Administration as a whole) has been communicating ideas for a long time. I am confident that, if "The Truth" is ever completely revealed about the GW Bush presidency, we will know that the bulk of the foundation of his presidency and his policies was fictional, not factual. I believe that George W. Bush has lied to Congress (...and we're not talking about "I ... did not ... have ... sexual relations ... with that woman." here... This is serious business. Thousands of people have died and hundreds of billions of Taxpayers' Dollars have been spent based on Bush's proclamations. This is no marital infidelity. This is much, much, MUCH worse.), lied to the American Public and lied to the Allies of the United States to win popular support for an "Eternal War", which, ultimately, only benefits producers of armaments and fuel and their supporters.

...And the worst part of all this, as far as I can tell, is that the bulk of the American public doesn't know and doesn't care, as long as they can have their hizzouse.

Shizzle.

...and just as an aside: By most polls, Bush's approval rating is still in the 30% range. That means that after all the stuff that's gone down up to this point (domestic spying, Valerie Plame, ENRON, Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, USA PATRIOT Act, Judicial Appointments, Faith Based Initiative, No Child Left Behind, Endless taxcuts for the wealthy in the face of balooning debt, two simultaneously unnecessary "wars", massive entitlement cuts, unfunded mandates, hundreds of thousands of "high quality manufacturing jobs" lost as American companies shift manufacturing overseas and on and on and on), three people in an elevator load of ten think Dubya's steering a course to prosperity. Eek.

Taking Cartoons too Seriously

As anyone who's read anything I've ever written about religion or faith or belief in gods or anything like that should readily be able to tell you, I feel people take religion far too seriously based on far too little consideration.

Case in point: The Danish Cartoon Row.

Problem 1: The physical appearance of Mohammed (and yes there are dozens of ways to spell it... I try to treat them all equally) in his lifetime is no more well-dcoumented than the appearance of Jesus, Moses, Lao Tse, Confucious and a host of others in their lifetimes, if they actually existed. I could draw a smiley-faced stick-figure and if I said it was Muhammad, well then... it's him and I need to be stoned to death, apparently.

Problem B: Has anyone within the radical and/or fundamentalist Islamist camp... and by that, I mean the people willing to be stampeded, trampled to death, suffocated, shot and otherwise made to be not alive anymore in order to indicate their distaste for these Danish cartoons... given a moment's thought to the idea, that: God is great, yeah? Omnipotent, some say, yeah? All-knowing? Sure. And God's on your side, right? Absolutely! How could it be otherwise?! So couldn't... let's go a step further... wouldn't an omnipotent, omniscient god, pissed off about the heretical misrepresentation of His Prophet by infidels, just smite the infidels, Himself, in a manner which is not only aparent to the smoten infidels, but the entire world?! Read any religious text... gods are big on theatre. I mean, if I was such a god, that's what I'd do. I'd have a perfectly Denmark-shaped bolt of lightning ... serious, no-shit lightning... shoot across the universe... like from the complete other side... instantly. Take THAT, Einstein! I mean this event would be so laden with miraculous shit scientists would have no choice but to throw their hands up and go into spoon-bending. The perfectly-Denmark-shaped bolt of lightning would hit... Denmark! Not just scorch it... not just leave a crater... no!... instantly excavate a perfect conic, Denmark-shaped core from the Earth, and just so there would be no doubt that it happened, I'd set it up so that the water wouldn't flood the hole.... no, the absence of Denmark would be glaringly obvious because of the glaringly-obvious, Denmark-shaped absence-of-Denmark, all the way to the center of the Earth. No volcanos, floods, disruptions to the Earth's magnetic field... After all, we are talking about a miracle here... an "act of god"... a no-joking-around, "I can do anything, I'm the chief of police." sort of action. The "laws of nature" do not apply here. In fact, just to make it clear what this was all about (being tired of people always misreading my "signs") suspended over the Denmark-shaped absence-of-Denmark, I'd have a virtual billboard, permanently and clearly written in the language of the reader and at always at a right angle to the reader's axis of vision (remember, this is a miracle... laws of nature are moot, here), saying,

"Denmark was destroyed by me because of its heretical depiction of my Prophet, Mohammed... Muhammad...? Anyway, you know what I mean.

I am great.
--- Allah

P.S. Please direct any questions, comments or praise to god@allahuakbar.com Donations accepted via PayPal."

I think that would erase any doubt.


It would seem to me... and some tell me I think too much... or am "too rational"... but momentarily disregarding such notions... It would seem to me that since something like this DIDN'T happen (and I concede that Allah - if there is a god and it's the Muslim one, and they've gotten everything right so far {hmm.. yeah...} He/She/It may be simmering a bit; trying to let the temper dissipate a bit before reacting. I do that sometimes.) Any self-respecting Muslim would HAVE to take a moment and wonder whether god is really there... or ever was.... I mean... If the representation by mortals of the face of Muhommid is SUCH a heinous offense to god, wouldn't... shouldn't god, the victim of this crime, act? ...if only in self defense?... not act "through his followers" but REALLY ACT. Raining frogs, Burning sulpher falling from the sky, but only within certain political borders. Halt the rotation of the Earth! Sterilize an entire race or species! Flood the Earth seven miles deep! ...and, god, whatever you do, make sure you SIGN YOUR WORK! None of this, "We crash these planes into your buildings in the name of Allah!!" bullshit. Let Allah speak for himself, for a change!