[Oops. Forgot again. MAJeff posting this one]
——
I have to admit, this is probably me being an American, but until a few days ago I wasn’t aware of all the tensions between Georgia and Russia. What I know now, though, is that people are dying.
So, for the folks in the know, or in the region, what’s going on? What do you see as root causes? What will be the effects of this conflict? Any good sites for further reading? Anything average citizens outside the region can do?
Sastra here.
I’m about halfway through, and really enjoying, Robert Price’s new book, Top Secret: The Truth Behind Today’s Pop Mysticisms.
Bob Price has an interesting background: he started out as a roaring Pentacostal Minister, gradually grew into a high-end Christian theologian, and eventually evolved to his present form as secular humanist. He’s currently teaching classes in comparative religion — and also happens to be an expert on HP Lovecraft and science fiction. I think this wide-ranging perspective gives him a particular advantage when dealing with religious topics. He’s been into almost everything, and can compare, contrast, and understand different mindsets with apparent ease. His analogies are often original, and spot on.
Even atheists are still influenced by the religious beliefs they once held. I was raised “freethinker.” Nobody at school knew what that meant, and I had a hard time explaining it, since I wasn’t sure what the alternative was. I wasn’t taught any particular religion, but it seemed to be a cultural prerequisite for having a “meaning,” so I would pick up bits and strands of things that seemed interesting to me, and try them on. I remember deciding in 5th grade to worship the Greek gods, since they would clearly be available, and very grateful for the attention. It seemed odd that they had so few current fans. But, by the time I was a teenager, I became enamored of the “psychic sciences,” and got into New Age.
Having since gotten myself OUT of New Age, I am particularly interested in books and articles that address and critique these self-proclaimed more enlightened, sophisticated, “holistic” forms of spirituality. My interest is not merely personal: such views are still held by many intelligent, well-educated, liberal-thinking people – and many of them take it all very seriously, and yield the power to have it taken seriously in secular arenas. These are not really marginal beliefs. As Price writes:
Sastra here.
I’m about halfway through, and really enjoying, Robert Price’s new book, Top Secret: The Truth Behind Today’s Pop Mysticisms.
Bob Price has an interesting background: he started out as a roaring Pentacostal Minister, gradually grew into a high-end Christian theologian, and eventually evolved to his present form as secular humanist. He’s currently teaching classes in comparative religion — and also happens to be an expert on HP Lovecraft and science fiction. I think this wide-ranging perspective gives him a particular advantage when dealing with religious topics. He’s been into almost everything, and can compare, contrast, and understand different mindsets with apparent ease. His analogies are often original, and spot on.
Even atheists are still influenced by the religious beliefs they once held. I was raised “freethinker.” Nobody at school knew what that meant, and I had a hard time explaining it, since I wasn’t sure what the alternative was. I wasn’t taught any particular religion, but it seemed to be a cultural prerequisite for having a “meaning,” so I would pick up bits and strands of things that seemed interesting to me, and try them on. I remember deciding in 5th grade to worship the Greek gods, since they would clearly be available, and very grateful for the attention. It seemed odd that they had so few current fans. But, by the time I was a teenager, I became enamored of the “psychic sciences,” and got into New Age.
Having since gotten myself OUT of New Age, I am particularly interested in books and articles that address and critique these self-proclaimed more enlightened, sophisticated, “holistic” forms of spirituality. My interest is not merely personal: such views are still held by many intelligent, well-educated, liberal-thinking people – and many of them take it all very seriously, and yield the power to have it taken seriously in secular arenas. These are not really marginal beliefs. As Price writes:
Someone asked if I went to church yesterday. Yes. This one:
I was only there for the gargoyles, which are all of Ecuadorian wildlife.
(Now I have to go catch a plane to the islands…)
Here’s a little funny for your Sunday morning, just to change things up a bit.
Are you feeling forced to vote for the lesser of two evils in the upcoming (American) presidential election? That trusted source The Onion shows you how you can pretend you care, while not having to vote at all.
Today Now!: How To Pretend You Give A Shit About The Election
Note: because I’ve caused some confusion before, I will note that my text above was largely sarcastic, and I really do believe that it is important to vote.
Posted by LisaJ
Sunday at 9am Central, tune in to Atheists Talk radio for a chat with Lori Lipman Brown of the Secular Coalition and Louis Appignani, Humanist Philanthropist.
MAJeff here, playing “host” this Sunday.
The image above is a bit dated. It was a poster produced for last year’s Folsom Street Fair in San Francsicso. (For those out of the know, the Folsom Street Fair is a queer leather/BDSM festival.) Of course, the tighty-righties got terribly fussy over it.
Now, if you like your christ-cock a bit more hippie-ish, or if you’re a show-tune queen, this might be more up your alley:
That’s from the upcoming film, Hamlet 2.
Of course, you could just get your jesus-jizz the old fashioned way:
That’s El Greco’s Carducho’s Stigmatization of St. Francis, which is part of a traveling exhibit of Spanish art from the reign of Phillip III. I saw the show in Boston a few weeks ago. Very nice exhibition, overall.
The erotic had been central to many forms of religious expression, not the least of which are the various “saintly ecstasies.” However, move it into popular cultural forms, or turn “the savior” into a black leather queer, and you’ve crossed a whole lotta lines.
Well, pull out a video recorder. Give him a dildo and you can watch Jesus fucking Christ on your DVD player or via streaming video.
Quito is not a shiny city. It’s a bit shabby, with peeling paint, narrow twisty streets, buses belching fumes, and cheap gray tenements erupting all over the hillsides, and it is also far too churchy for my tastes. But man, it has character. It’s a wonderfully lively place, and what it lacks in chrome it replaces with color and quirkiness and charm. We had a good time today touring the Old City.
I was charmed by this little restaurant with guinea pigs turning on a spit. We didn’t have a chance to stop and sample them, though, since we had to scurry up the road to visit the equator.
There’s the famous Trophy Wife, straddling two whole hemispheres at once.
Tomorrow, we have to rise up early for our flight to the Galapagos — communication may get even more limited for a while. Trust me, though, we’ll be having fun.
Just for fun, contrast Nisbet’s latest wank-fest with the spat going on between Libby Purves and Richard Dawkins in the Times. (also see Libby’s rebuttal).
In her criticism of the Dawkins, Purves invokes a false dilemma akin to that of our domestic framing expert, but I note a conspicuous absence of vituperative smugness in her approach.
~Danio
Sastra here again.
We anticipate it. Or, at least, I do. Whenever some lunatic in a not-so-happy place in his life goes into a happy place with a gun and starts to shoot at random human targets, sooner or later someone blames it on atheism. Or links it to atheism. Or compares it to atheism. Or otherwise brings up atheism, as the not very random target of ultimate explanation.
It didn’t take long for someone to use the recent tragic shootings in the Unitarian Church in Tennessee to illustrate the dangers of “militant atheism.” The Life!beliefs section of my local paper regularly features a syndicated columnist, Rev. Norris Burkes, who is “a civilian hospital chaplain and an Air Guard chaplain in northern California.” I occasionally glance through his column, which tends to focus on the pleasant, reasonable, ecumenical spirituality of good works and thoughtful counsel. He seems like a nice guy. He almost certainly is.
I didn’t much care for his recent column, though, which was titled “Turn deaf ears to whispers of hatred.”
After bemoaning the hatred that drove killer Jim Adkinson and others like him, Burkes rhetorically asks where it came from. Whence that infectious strand of ignorance, apathy, violence, and hate? Well, the killers yell what others whisper.
“In the world of religion, I’ve yet to see more infectious carriers than I’ve seen in the likes of Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. These evangelical atheists would have you believe that all our problems stem from all forms of religious faith.”
Oh NOES! Not “atheists think ALL our problems stem from religion!” Not the “atheists only see the bad side of religion” meme again! And what about STALIN and POL POT? How do you explain THAT? Yes, the ‘pygmies and dwarves’ of atheism show up, on schedule.
I’m not sure if Burkes has read any of the books himself, or if he’s only read the Nicholas Kristof op-ed which ran in the Times last December. He assures the reader that what Kristof characterized as “the increasingly assertive, often obnoxious atheist offensive” was subsequently soundly trumped and defeated by bringing up Stalin on one side, and soup kitchens on the other. Poor Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins apparently never considered, never addressed, never even thought about either totalitarian Communism, or the fact that religions do good works, too — in addition to the witch hunts, honor killings, and massacres, of course.
You know, I’ve read the books by all three gentlemen – Hitchens, Harris, and Dawkins – and I have a vague sort of recollection that maybe they did deal with those issues once or twice, in passing. Like devoting several chapters to them, or setting them up as the starting point for their theme, or something like that.
But no matter. Enough of religious intolerance, on both sides. Burkes puts forth the solution: “We must allow room for the conversation.” Conversations, that is, with GOOD atheists, and not the hate-filled, militant, in-your-face kind. Rather, Christians seek and honor the brand of non-believer who is gentle, nice, and neither in-your-face nor in your bookstore nor in your television on PBS. And he specifically spells out what it takes to be the right kind of atheist:
