To the Editor: Instead of trick-or-treating, get your kids to party as biblical figures
By The Post-Standard
October 28, 2009, 6:54AM

To the Editor:

The pagan feast of Halloween is foreign to Christian tradition and has become a superstitious and empty way of imposing mindless triviality.

The day has its origin in the Celtic New Year, which celebrated the return of the spirits of the dead to their homes. Hence, those who observe Halloween, though they are probably ignorant of what they are doing and why they are doing it, are in reality celebrating death, the devil and hell.

The observance of Halloween is mixed with Christian festivities whose meanings are totally contrary to Halloween. On Nov. 1, Christians celebrate belief in the communion of saints. On Nov. 2, we make visits to the cemetery as a religious and profoundly human gesture, inspired by the hope in the resurrection. I encouraged Christians to celebrate the Christians truths of these days with renewed faith as a response to the real concerns of mankind today. Also, as an alternative to Halloween I might suggest that parents not allow their children to go trick-or-treating, but instead attend costume parties where they can dress as biblical figures.

Weekend weather outlook is old-timey with a touch of crazy. But hey, who am I to judge? Let’s see if I can contribute in some way… maybe the following will inspire some costume designs:

Sodom and Gomorrah
Jan Brueghel the Elder.

Altar piece at Brixen, South Tirol
Michael Pacher

Cain and Abel
Il Tintoretto

Garden of Earthly Delight – Hell
Jheronimus Bosch

Motorhead -No Voices in the Sky

Nobody gives a damn about anybody else,
Think everyone should feel the way they feel themselves.
Rich men think that happiness is a million dollar bills,
So how come half of them O.D. on sleeping pills?
Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, you all know what I mean,
What’s the use of a cry for help, if no one hears the screams,
No one hears the scream…

No voices in the sky,
Confusion blinds the eye,
Can’t take it with you when you die,
No voices in the sky.

The ones who dedicate the flags to make you brave,
They also consecrate the headstone on your grave,
Ritual remembrance,
when no one knows your name,
Don’t help a single widow learn to fight the pain,
Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, you all know what I mean,
What’s the use of a cry for help, if no one hears the screams,
No one hears the scream…

No voices in the sky,
Confusion blinds the eye,
Can’t take it with you when you die,
No voices in the sky.

Politicians kissing babies for good luck,
T.V. preachers sell salvation for a buck,
You don’t need no golden cross, to tell you wrong from right,
The world’s worst murderers were those who saw the light.
Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, you all know what I mean,
What’s the use of a cry for help, if no one hears the screams,
No one hears the scream…

No voices in the sky,
Confusion blinds the eye,
Can’t take it with you when you die,
No voices in the sky.

Rage in the Town of Bethlehem

…the 4th of July. It was getting late that night and there were fireworks going off in the neighborhood, like every year (although it is technically illegal within city limits.) Then, I started to hear something weird. It sounded like fireworks hitting the roof of the house. My husband and I went out to investigate. When we went out back we saw the first firecracker hit a pecan tree in my parent’s yard. Then, we saw the the second (one of the big ones) go off at ground level in my sister’s backyard only feet from her backdoor. It lit the entire backyard up. We saw that the people down the hill were aiming fireworks at my sister’s house. We ran over there to tell them to stop. That is when we had a gun pulled on us.

The wife is the one who pulled out a handgun. The male just stood there and said “get off my land”, although we were on my father’s land. My husband was the first to notice the handgun pointed at him. He said that having a gun pointed at him made him uncomfortable and asked if she would kindly put it away. That is when she went all right wing nutso on us, saying, “it’s my right to carry a gun, you can’t take my rights away.” Seriously, she said that. So, we stood there longer than most people would have if there was a gun pointed at them and continued to ask them to be careful where they are pointing their fireworks. After we left, they packed everything up and went inside.

Anyway, you might wonder how this story ties into the above story. Well, it turns out that the animosity towards my sister started when she got a Wiccan bumper sticker on her car. She dared to be openly Wiccan. These people were simply following the trend of expressing fear of what is different in the form of hatred and violence. As a result, I had a gun pointed at me on the 4th of July.

A few days after the incident the woman gun toter came to my dad and apologized for “the gun thing”. She claimed that the reason she pulled a gun on us was that she was afraid for her husband’s life. See, he was in Iraq and now has a pin in his back and she thought we were going to hurt him and she said that they had accidentally shot all those firecrackers at our houses. Yeah right. Why was her first response to pull a gun on her neighbors if they were innocently shooting fireworks and accidentally shot some at our houses?

Of course, they are patriotic, gun loving, Christian, conservative Americans. And that gives them the right to pull guns on their neighbors because they thought that they were above the law and common decency since he was injured in Iraq. I said that night that I was done. I disown Alabama and the South in general.

Please check out my post from my Alabama excursion.

The different religions received into that state?

The first settlers in this country were emigrants from England, of the English church, just at a point of time when it was flushed with complete victory over the religious of all other persuasions. Possessed, as they became, of the powers of making, administering, and executing the laws, they shewed equal intolerance in this country with their Presbyterian brethren, who had emigrated to the northern government. The poor Quakers were flying from persecution in England. They cast their eyes on these new countries as asylums of civil and religious freedom; but they found them free only for the reigning sect. Several acts of the Virginia assembly of 1659, 1662, and 1693, had made it penal in parents to refuse to have their children baptized; had prohibited the unlawful assembling of Quakers; had made it penal for any master of a vessel to bring a Quaker into the state; had ordered those already here, and such as should come thereafter, to be imprisoned till they should abjure the country; provided a milder punishment for their first and second return, but death for their third; had inhibited all persons from suffering their meetings in or near their houses, entertaining them individually, or disposing of books which supported their tenets. If no capital execution took place here, as did in New-England, it was not owing to the moderation of the church, or spirit of the legislature, as may be inferred from the law itself; but to historical circumstances which have not been handed down to us. The Anglicans retained full possession of the country about a century. Other opinions began then to creep in, and the great care of the government to support their own church, having begotten an equal degree of indolence in its clergy, two-thirds of the people had become dissenters at the commencement of the present revolution. The laws indeed were still oppressive on them, but the spirit of the one party had subsided into moderation, and of the other had risen to a degree of determination which commanded respect.

The present state of our laws on the subject of religion is this. The convention of May 1776, in their declaration of rights, declared it to be a truth, and a natural right, that the exercise of religion should be free; but when they proceeded to form on that declaration the ordinance of government, instead of taking up every principle declared in the bill of rights, and guarding it by legislative sanction, they passed over that which asserted our religious rights, leaving them as they found them. The same convention, however, when they met as a member of the general assembly in October 1776, repealed all acts of parliament which had rendered criminal the maintaining any opinions in matters of religion, the forbearing to repair to church, and the exercising any mode of worship; and suspended the laws giving salaries to the clergy, which suspension was made perpetual in October 1779. Statutory oppressions in religion being thus wiped away, we remain at present under those only imposed by the common law, or by our own acts of assembly. At the common law, heresy was a capital offence, punishable by burning. Its definition was left to the ecclesiastical judges, before whom the conviction was, till the statute of the 1 El. c. 1. circumscribed it, by declaring, that nothing should be deemed heresy, but what had been so determined by authority of the canonical scriptures, or by one of the four first general councils, or by some other council having for the grounds of their declaration the express and plain words of the scriptures. Heresy, thus circumscribed, being an offence at the common law, our act of assembly of October 1777, c. 17. gives cognizance of it to the general court, by declaring, that the jurisdiction of that court shall be general in all matters at the common law. The execution is by the writ De haeretico comburendo. By our own act of assembly of 1705, c. 30, if a person brought up in the Christian religion denies the being of a God, or the Trinity, or asserts there are more Gods than one, or denies the Christian religion to be true, or the scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offence by incapacity to hold any office or employment ecclesiastical, civil, or military; on the second by disability to sue, to take any gift or legacy, to be guardian, executor, or administrator, and by three years imprisonment, without bail. A father’s right to the custody of his own children being founded in law on his right of guardianship, this being taken away, they may of course be severed from him, and put, by the authority of a court, into more orthodox hands. This is a summary view of that religious slavery, under which a people have been willing to remain, who have lavished their lives and fortunes for the establishment of their civil freedom. (*) The error seems not sufficiently eradicated, that the operations of the mind, as well as the acts of the body, are subject to the coercion of the laws. But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. If it be said, his testimony in a court of justice cannot be relied on, reject it then, and be the stigma on him. Constraint may make him worse by making him a hypocrite, but it will never make him a truer man. It may fix him obstinately in his errors, but will not cure them. Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion, by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test of their investigation. They are the natural enemies of error, and of error only. Had not the Roman government permitted free enquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free enquiry been indulged, at the aera of the reformation, the corruptions of Christianity could not have been purged away. If it be restrained now, the present corruptions will be protected, and new ones encouraged. Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now. Thus in France the emetic was once forbidden as a medicine, and the potatoe as an article of food. Government is just as infallible too when it fixes systems in physics. Galileo was sent to the inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere: the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error however at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex. The government in which he lived was wise enough to see that this was no question of civil jurisdiction, or we should all have been involved by authority in vortices. In fact, the vortices have been exploded, and the Newtonian principle of gravitation is now more firmly established, on the basis of reason, than it would be were the government to step in, and to make it an article of necessary faith. Reason and experiment have been indulged, and error has fled before them. It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors? Fallible men; men governed by bad passions, by private as well as public reasons. And why subject it to coercion? To produce uniformity. But is uniformity of opinion desireable? No more than of face and stature. Introduce the bed of Procrustes then, and as there is danger that the large men may beat the small, make us all of a size, by lopping the former and stretching the latter. Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a Censor morum over each other. Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth. Let us reflect that it is inhabited by a thousand millions of people. That these profess probably a thousand different systems of religion. That ours is but one of that thousand. That if there be but one right, and ours that one, we should wish to see the 999 wandering sects gathered into the fold of truth. But against such a majority we cannot effect this by force. Reason and persuasion are the only practicable instruments. To make way for these, free enquiry must be indulged; and how can we wish others to indulge it while we refuse it ourselves. But every state, says an inquisitor, has established some religion. No two, say I, have established the same. Is this a proof of the infallibility of establishments? Our sister states of Pennsylvania and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely. Religion is well supported; of various kinds, indeed, but all good enough; all sufficient to preserve peace and order: or if a sect arises, whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play, and reasons and laughs it out of doors, without suffering the state to be troubled with it. They do not hang more malefactors than we do. They are not more disturbed with religious dissensions. On the contrary, their harmony is unparalleled, and can be ascribed to nothing but their unbounded tolerance, because there is no other circumstance in which they differ from every nation on earth. They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them. Let us too give this experiment fair play, and get rid, while we may, of those tyrannical laws. It is true, we are as yet secured against them by the spirit of the times. I doubt whether the people of this country would suffer an execution for heresy, or a three years imprisonment for not comprehending the mysteries of the Trinity. But is the spirit of the people an infallible, a permanent reliance? Is it government? Is this the kind of protection we receive in return for the rights we give up? Besides, the spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecutor, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going down hill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion.

*My emphasis added. And now St. John’s.

But I do recommend the following stories:

• Smokers in Auburn bar fined
• Subdued victory for religious freedom
• Memorial Service for Spc. James D. Gudridge

The pineapple room is booked up tonite.

(H/T) Betmo

See also: Blue Gal

First there was the Half Hour News Hour.

Then came Conservapedia.

Now…

Monday, March 19, 2007
The Best of the Worst of GodTube

Amongst the legions of YouTube knock-offs that have sprung onto the Internet, aiming to appeal to interest groups who feel marginalized by YouTube’s terms of services or its wide spectrum of subjects, there are some which are so disgusting and fetishistic that they really can only be explored during a reverie of private self-loathing [BeastTube, YouTube for bestiality enthusiasts. Not work safe and very disturbing, although a lot of the dogs seem like they're having a good time].

On the other side of the spectrum, there’s GodTube, a YouTube clone that is dedicated to Christian-themed videos. And while many of the videos GodTube has to offer are no more offensive in their pervasive stupidity than the majority of YouTube’s slack-jawed amateur offerings, there is something a bit insidious about them.

For the record, what is disturbing about many of GodTube’s videos is not that they are done by Christians, or enthusiastically discuss topics like Intelligent Design, the immorality of homosexuality, etc. What is disturbing about GodTube is that it is an observable microcosm of the way that fundamentalist Christians have shut themselves off from any outside perspective. The result is mental and creative poverty. GodTube’s videos are no more stupid than any of YouTube’s videos because they mutter gibberish about intelligent design, or indulge in lame Christian-themed parodies of mainstream media. But they sure as hell are a heck of a lot funnier.

“It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.” – Herman Melville

Hell no

“Why not?”

Because it is the taking of an innocent life!

“Innocents are not killed in war?”

Yes

“Then how is it that you can be fine with killing whomever in another country, but abortion is unbelievably wrong?”

Cuz it is.

(Not satisfied with the Cuz I said so argument I pressed. After all, if I wouldn’t accept that as an answer from my parents why would I now?)

At what point is the fetus to be considered alive? Directly to the point when is it “murder”?

At conception.

“At conception a fetus is no different than a pair of amoebas, parameciums (remember them?), or a tumor.”

Yeah but a tumor isn’t going to be a person.

“Granted, but at conception it is a grouping of cells, nothing more. As for myself I believe life starts when you take your first breath.”

How can you say that? Look at the images of sonograms kids sucking their thumbs etc.

“My perspective is Biblical in origin.”(Taken aback by this, he paused. He then asked for backup of my statements.)

“In Genesis it was not until Adam was given the “breath of life” from his Adonai did he become “man”. After all, it’s Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve right?”

He made mention, though he couldn’t exactly or indirectly quote, of a later verse in which God is professed to have “known” one of the prophets while still in his mother. I believe it was John, or an OT guy. I asked him to provide the same courtesy I had given him to back his argument up. He couldn’t so we moved on.

He made claim that all Muslims are out to kill all Christians. That we are in a state of war, and should live as such. Weapons at the ready locked and loaded.

“Have you ever heard of the Prayer of Saint Francis?”

Nope

“Well, it’s probably just a Catholic thing (saints).” So I recited it for him as I wished for quite awhile to be a Priest. Make me a channel of your peace…

He said he’d heard it somewhere before. I then asked if he felt that Jesus was his brother in the service of god. “Yes” Am I your brother? “Yes” Are all men on the planet your brother, in a biblical sense? “Yes” I asked him to hand me his keys. He obliged. I thumbed through to find the inevitable “WWJD” keychain. I asked him what Jesus would do today. “If he were a citizen of the United States in 2006, what would he be doing?”

I can’t answer that.

“Ok, (allowing him to wiggle out of that one) would he be arming himself?”

Probably not.

“Would he be bombing abortion clinics or school buses?”

No.

“Given what you know about the man, would you say that he, being a peace loving guy who hung around with “whores”, would support our nation’s foreign policies?”

Yes

“How?”

We support Israel.

“Yes we do. But the Israelites were the ones that killed him.”

Yeah, but he was Jesus so he forgave them.

“And so, what would Jesus do in response to 9-11?”

He probably would have forgiven them.

“Is this keychain of yours “WWJD” something to live by?”

Yes

“A maxim of sorts?”

Yup

“So, you hold a keychain that asks “What would Jesus do?” You’ve agreed that he would most likely be “soft” on terrorism or at the very least not support our foreign policies, you claim to live by the man’s examples of peace and fraternity …and you support war?”
Yup“You don’t see hypocrisy in that?”

Nope

I looked at his son who was still standing there waiting for his Dad to lay the smack down on this godless hippie freak which never happened. A light came into his eyes, and he breathed in so as to speak but held back as his eyes traveled to his Dad. His head ducked in silent obedience. He saw his father had just gotten his ass kicked again in an argument he felt to be his strong suit. We continued, and he related how the world was going to end soon, in his lifetime, and how great heaven’s going to be.

I asked him to remove himself from that thought process for one second (Believe me God won’t mind) is that a healthy process to guide our foreign policies? Well if it’s true, then yes. “What if it’s not true?”

Well, if you’ve read the bible in the New…

“Testament in the books of the Apocalypse it says, blah ditty blah. Name me one thing that was prophesized in the New Testament or old that has come true.”

Jesus was born as the Messiah.

“Well, the majority of the world’s population disagrees with that perspective. So, given that this world is going to end in our lifetime, our foreign policies should reflect that thought, even though it may not end in our lifetime? That’s being a little ignorant to the possibilities no?”

Maybe….

Then the owner yelled (not really) that we were extremely busy and we were not at Trinity College, my name isn’t Martin Luther and his wasn’t John Calvin…

And so I made people food to eat, and he cussed under his breath.
So for the rest of the night I sang the Prayer of Saint Francis to myself (it is a lovely poem) and asked myself what would Jesus do?

posted by Bacchus  # 12/01/2006 10:11:00 AM (3) Volleys | Trackback ]]> http://mccs1977.com/2006/12/01/discussion-on-religion/feed/ 0