Thursday, March 02, 2006

Truth and Beauty in Faith.

Two women who epitomise their callings.

Mariam Fartah has given three sons to Allah, and would give her remaining three sons.

Sister Margaret Wood, who died recently, gave herself to her God.

Apologies for the sizing of the image of Sr Margaret. I don't know how to resize photos.
Update: I've resized the pix. Thanks for the idea, Sean. I actually did it without the pixsizer. YAY!


At 12:04 AM, Blogger C.L. said...

Says it all Nilk. Thanks for the story link on Sister Margaret.

Your original pic was too small to enlarge well. Why not shrink the other broad?

At 7:10 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

I'm a bit deficient in html, CL. I haven't got a clue yet on how to resize.

That's my mission for today, I guess. :)

At 10:29 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Both women are just as dangerous…….

Muslims want to interfere in my life. Force me to pray 5 times a day. Not partake in alcohol. Not partake in premarital sex. Force women to cover themselves. Force everyone to live by Sharia Law.

The Catholics? Well, under a catholic dominated Eire government:


Until 1979 condoms were banned,

the pill was illegal until 1985.

the “morning after pill” is STILL ILLEGAL.

homosexuality was punishable by imprisonment until 1993.

Pre marital sex was technically illegal.

Divorce was ILLEGAL until 1997.

No wonder the Protestants in the North didn’t want any part of a united Ireland!!!!

A professed Catholic health Minister (Tony Abbot) tried hard to keep an abortion pill off the shelves of Australia. Now he will spend $50 million on “Abortion counseling” 50 dollars says the Catholic church gets the contract!!!!!

Catholicism is just as radical, and as dangerous, as Islam. Before you start saying that Islam is a restrictive, backward religion, take a GOOD LOOK at Catholicism!!!!

My simple message to all religious fanatics – “LEAVE MY WAY OF LIFE ALONE!!!!


At 10:50 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

I hadn't quite looked at it that way, Ross. This is why we need the separation of Church and State.

Regarding RU486, I don't believe that it should be available over the counter. When it comes to abortion, it's going to happen whether we like it or not, and a woman deserves the same access to medical treatment for her pregnancy irrespective of the outcome.

One of the biggest problems with the abortion debate is that babies have become (in my opinion) commodified - knocked up and don't want it? Here, take a pill.

It would be better if girls or women didn't get pregnant in the first place.

There is plenty of sex education in the schools, but little, it seems, on morality.

(For the record, I'm catholic, but have been forming my opinion on abortion since before I became one.)

If the pill is going to be available, let it be at the discretion of the medical fraternity. The same with abortion. Ideally it should be a consultative process where all the options are discussed. The final call belongs to the woman (girl), with the man (or boy)having some input.

It takes two to make a baby, so the two need to be aware of the costs and consequences.

Personally, I find abortion abhorrent, and only once have I ever had the need to consider it. That was an ugly situation, and luckily for me it was unnecessary. (Hooray for false positives!)

However, there are plenty of others who have seriously had to consider it and take action.

Abortion in a lot of cases is a lifestyle decision. Not all, but a lot of them.

At 11:34 AM, Blogger dusty_buster said...

There's a free program on the net called 'PIXresizer'.
Do a Goggle for it - even a gay bloke like me can use it.

At 11:50 AM, Blogger C.L. said...

Sure, Ross. Why only the other day in County Clare a gang of Irish Sisters of Perpetual Adoration decapitated some Muslim schoolgirls on their way home from school.

Your "way of life" would not exist if it wasn't for Catholicism - the Western world, for good or ill, is the child of the Catholic Church. The child of Islam is an altogether more hideous brat - but, hey, move to Tehran and prove me wrong.

You mention "the Protestants in the North"? Now if you want to meet some real barbarians, in-breds and fundamentalists, the Shankill Road is probably still the place to go.

At 12:09 PM, Anonymous meredith said...

I'm with you c.l.
I judge religions on how they affect me and my society, I presently have no problems with any religion but islam, there are no suburbs of violent catholics in Sydney where i have to fear for my life.(Irelands problems are isolated unlike islams) The ZOG if its real isn't having me arrested or physically hurt/killed for anything.

On the pill, sometimes an abortion is sadly the only option, but presently they are a verging on a method of birth control, they should be available , but only in genuine emergencys. I don't like over breeding in general, we have enough humans, cultures should be encouraged to curtail to our breeding rates if they live in Oz rather than us catch up to theres in order to survive.

Sorry i was a bit of a cow a few threads back, I was over-tired and fluey back then, no excuse i admit, but anyway, Im not Jewish, I'm Athiest. You can donate that 50 bucks to a Holocaust Museum or the Catholics :P

At 2:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I haven’t done the sums, but at a guess 10 times more people have died at the hands of Catholics than Muslims. Ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition? Or read about the Spanish conquest of South America?

But the interesting thing is every time I mention a group who are treated like, or act like Muslims, everyone reacts in “shock horror”!!!

It would be funny – like a Monty Python sketch, if it were not so serious.

I will not live under Sharia law, imposed by people of a different religion to me. I will NOT live under Catholic Law either!!!

Priests, Imams, Mullahs, all belong in the same boat, and it needs taking out beyond Australia’s borders and sinking!!!

Protestants? Funny thing – the current “troubles” started as a civil rights movement. In the North Abortion was legal. So too was the right to use the Pill, buy condoms, get divorced, have sex out of wedlock, or be gay/lesbian. All freedoms that were not enjoyed in the South because of a bunch of fundamental religious bigots. So the Catholics came north to buy condoms, went to England for an abortion. The hypocrisy is very similar to that seen in Muslims today…..

But of course CL – if you are a Catholic, you won’t see anything wrong with your religion, or its stranglehold upon my freedoms. Just like the average Muslim doesn’t………..


At 2:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Regarding RU486, I don't believe that it should be available over the counter”.

I respect you decision not to use RU486, but why should you influence MY right to use it???

I think what REALY pissed me off was “Asshole Abbot” and his bigot friends claiming that he didn’t want it authorized because of the “risk to females”.

That is an OUTRIGHT LIE!!!!!!

The risks of being harmed from RU486 are LOWER than those of being allergic to peanuts. Does Abbot BAN PEANUTS!!!!!

The truth is, the Priest get hold of Asshole Abbot in the Confession box and says “Tony, Tony my boy, the Pope says you cannot allow that nasty little pill to go ahead”

I REALLY want to put steel toecap boots on and kick Abbot and his Priest to death for daring to try to impose their stupid fucking religion on me.

I didn’t vote for the Pope, or the Catholic Church, and if Tony doesn’t understand that he had better get out of politics.

At 2:36 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

You know, I've never actually met anyone who is allergic to peanuts. I know schools where peanuts are banned for all of the children because one in the school is allergic.

Family day care and creches have peanut butter and the anything that hints at peanut banned just on the offchance a child may come along that has an allergy to peanuts.

I know people allergic to cats, dogs, strawberries, bees and I'm allergic to mushrooms. But no peanuts.

I don't know the figures on exactly how risky RU486 is, but given that one in four women will miscarry their first baby without any assistance, and the amount of things that can go wrong in a normal pregnancy anyway, surely a drug that impacts upon the reproductive system should be controlled.

All I have to do is look at my own family history. My grandmother had to have an operation before she could fall pregnant, and that was back in the 40s. She had 6 babies and miscarried 2. My mum had 3 live and miscarried 1. She also had a lot of problems and then a hysterectomy.

My sis has 2 children and 1 miscarriage. She's also had problems with polycystic ovaries.

I've got one child, been tested for cancer cervical and uterine cancer.

If I found myself pregnant and was going to terminate/abort/murder my unborn baby, I would prefer to do it under supervised conditions just in case.

A pill over the counter is not supervised. Just in case.

At 2:43 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

RE Tony Abbott and his being a Catholic.

What if he was an Anglican? Would that make a difference to you? On an atheist?

At 3:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No – if Asshole Abbot was a bloody Martian and started spouting crap to me I would be against him. He is NOT a Doctor, not a Chemist, not even a bloody scientist.

Why is everyone so worried about RU486? Do you want me to list 100 products that are FAR more dangerous that Asshole Abbot doesn’t restrict because it doesn’t go against the religious doctrine of his REAL leader, the Pope…..

Notice the prick doesn’t ban Cigarettes. Or Alcohol. Or fast cars.....

At 3:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a simple test of a religion or belief. If it is any good people will want to follow its doctrine…..

Islam fails at the first hurdle. No one with the ability to get more than three brain cells aligned at any single point in time would want to follow it. So how to propagate such bilge?

Well first of all you insist that any child born to any Muslim becomes a Muslim. Doesn’t matter if the mother or father is of any other belief, the kids become Muslim.

Secondly you impose a set of laws for force the population into following the religious doctrine. We call that Sharia law. As Nilk/leeanne knows, I am extremely concerned about how Sharia law is being introduced by stealth into Indonesia. A series of laws are being introduced to improve “moral welfare” of the people. They just happen to fit the teachings of Islam……….

So what of the Catholic Church? Well – if I marry a Catholic, my kids must be Catholic. (sound familiar?)

And – well take a good look at the laws in many Catholic countries…..

If Catholicism was so bloody good why did the Irish government have to enshrine its doctrine in LAW!!!!

If Islam is so bloody good why does Indonesia want to enshrine its doctrine in LAW!!!!

As the bargirls of Blok m would say, "same same"


At 3:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you notice how the weight loss drug Xenical has been approved as an over the counter drug despite SERIOUS misgivings????

Notice how Asshole Abbot didn’t bother stopping that????

Why? Because the pope doesn’t care if people die from that, so long as they don’t offend the Catholic dogma about abortion.

I used to live in the United Arab Emirates about 30 years ago. Christians were issued with “drinking licences”. You had to show it to buy alcohol in a bar. Maybe we should go the same way. Non Catholics could carry a licence allowing them access to the things the Pope says we cannot have……

At 4:11 PM, Blogger C.L. said...

anonymous seems very angry about this irrelevant phenomenon called religion. Almost religiously so.

At 4:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It NOT irrelevant when it impacts the lives of those who do not believe in its crackpot dogma.

Our objection to Islam is because of the impact it has upon our lives. After June, any Australian girl wearing a short skirt in Bali risks 3 months "re-education" in Islamic values. Any Western man kissing a girl in Bali risks 5 years in jail.....

This is because members of the Islamic defenders Front have pushed Islamic dogm.

Any non Catholic wanting to buy an over the counter abortion pill was facing jail because of Tony Abbot pushing Catholic Dogma.

At 4:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

But let me guess CL, your a Catholic, so you think the Holy Roman Catholic Church has the right to dictate to me because I am just an unbeliever...

That CL – is EXACTLY how Muslims see Infidels or Kafirs.

Just like you, they think I just don’t understand, and they know better than I do, so they think it only right to dictate to me how I should live my life.

I may be better educated, may be better qualified, may be more experienced, but that doesn’t count to a Muslim, nor apparently to a Catholic Health Minister!!!!!

At 5:43 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Ross, I really don't agree that Abbott's catholicism is the danger you believe.

I don't know about the Xenical misgivings - I caught a snippet on the teev the other day about it now being available otc and didn't pay a whole lot of attention.

If there are serious side effects and medical problems arising from it, then neither should it be available over the counter.

But back to Abbott and his beliefs, he is still a lot less dangerous than the current dhimmification of the world as we know it, and I believe that is where we should be focussing. Everything else is just diversionary tactics.

At 6:01 PM, Blogger Bill Cooper said...

I find it hard to understand in this age of easy to get contraception why so many women have unwanted pregnancies. I'm 50 now but when I was 18 everyone was having sex but we were all so scared of a pregnancy nearly everyone took strong precautions even though they were difficult to get - condoms and the pill that is. Now they sell condoms at every milk bar and there is no stigma for a young women getting the pill yet there are huge numbers of unwanted pregnancies every year. I can't help but think that many people use abortion rather than contraception I don't know why but they do. Are the people doing this just really dumb or lazy? I don't understand it but I have difficulty with the idea of subsidised abortions for someone who was too stupid/lazy to insist on a condom or take the pill.

At 6:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, IF Abbot would not release control of RU486 because of his religious beliefs, or because of external religious pressure, then it is a VERY serious problem.

I don’t see any greater risk from RU486 than a host of other medications, hence my firm belief that it is connected to his religious convictions.

Any religion that tries to impose its dogma upon an entire population is dangerous.

At 6:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any why should they not use abortion as a form of contraception? In Japan it is a normal, accepted method of birth control!!!

Yes abortions are subsidised. So to is childcare, child education, family allowance etc. Children are tax deductable, so the parents pay less income tax.....

It is cheaper on my tax if children are aborted.

At 6:45 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Bill, I think you will find that it is because sex is so common and accepted, as are the possible results.

As for contraception or lack thereof, for a lot of the younger guys, wearing a condom is a no-no. Apparently they lose sensitivity or can't keep it up (yes, even I've heard that line). The girls think it can't happen to them.

Mind you, some girls can't take the Pill (I'm one), and the rhythm method is not very reliable. The only 100% foolproof contraception is abstinence, after all.

And there is no longer the stigma attached to premarital or non-committal sex.

At 5:09 PM, Blogger Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. said...

"I haven’t done the sums, but at a guess 10 times more people have died at the hands of Catholics than Muslims. Ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition? Or read about the Spanish conquest of South America?"


Ever heard about the Mohammedan conquest of Christian North Africa, Spain, Balkans, Byzantine Empire and attempted invasion of western Europe? The crusades were a somewhat belated response to hundreds of years of Mohammedan aggression against Christians.

And by the way, the major religion which killed the most number of people in the twentieth century was atheism. So every religious position has got blood on its hands somewhere in its history - except possibly Unitarianism.

At 7:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Give me numbers and links mate. its put up or shut up time.

Not about atheism (I am well aware of Stalin) but give me comparisons between Islam and Catholicism.

Catholicism is as big a pile of fundametalist bigoted CRAP as Islam is. I have had the misfortune to live in both societies and both stink. Both are full of hypocracy and bullshit, and I do not, and WILL NOT live under either.

At 10:40 PM, Blogger C.L. said...

Keep a look out, then, anonymous. I understand the Josphite sisters are especially dangerous.

And the Trappists!

Good lord, they'll chop your head off as quick as look at you.

Mother Teresas's mob?

Suicide bombers. Every damn one of them.

At 12:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And in 100 years Bin Laden will bee viewed as you view Mother Taresa today. And to be honest both are/were fucking interfering assholes who caused trouble in other peoples countries.

mother Teresa's opposition to contraception caused more harm than 911 did!

At 11:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In fact, the greatest number of deaths attributed to religion was in the Chinese Taiping Rebellion, 1851-1864, when some 66 MILLION died.

Hung Xiu­quan (1814-1864) was the son of a farmer and an aspiring Chinese bureaucrat. He came under the influence of Christian missionaries, and reached the conclusion that he was the younger son of Jesus sent to found the Heavenly Kingdom on earth.

One agian, people forcing thier own CRAP views upon others led to a massive death toll.

At 1:35 PM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...


If you are going to lift verbatim from other sources it is accepted practice that you credit the source.

Your second paragraph is lifted in toto from the opening paragraph of this link:

Furthermore, this link suggests that Hung Xiu­qua believed himself to be the younger brother of Jesus NOT his younger son.

Cuttting and pasting without sourcing may have fooled your teachers but they were probably more stupid than you.

At 4:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually it was typed in from a book called:

"Gods Chinese Son, The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom of Hong Xiuquan"

Author: Prof. Johnathan D Spence (Yale)

Publisher: W. W. Norton & Co

ISBN 0-393-03844-0

I can if you wish go into great detail of his life from various sources.

The real villans were bloody missionaries like Rev Erwin Stevens who set up a mission in 19 New China street Canton, and William Milne, who first translated the bible into Chinese.

The Chinese should have butchered thme on the spot.

At 4:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I frequently post links, not to credit the author so much as to allow people like you to educate themselves.

In the case of this subject you will find that everyone copies everyone else, because of course it is all based upon a handful of original sources.

But if you want to be pedantic, try citing Taiping Tianguo Yinshu volume 10 "...

Or does you knowledge of China end at the local takeway?

At 4:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And hey - forget that your a Jewish Lawyer!!

Who the HELL set a convention about crediting sources in a comment on a blog?

This isn’t a Uni assignment mate. Just because you made a Pratt of yourself over Jews made into soap, and gas chambers that didn’t exist, don’t start making up the rules as you go!!!

At 4:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And as for Bills comments about "subsidised abortions", I would rather:

# throw all smokers out of cancer clinics,
# Throw all drug addicts out of rehab and psych wards,
# Throw all drunk drivers out of casualty wards
# Throw out all migrant retirees who didnt pay a sodding cent towards the health system before they moved here aged 65 then clog up the hospitals.

Did i leave any one out?

At 7:32 PM, Blogger Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. said...


Good luck finding a society without a religious influence. All law is embodied morality with a desire to punish (or more rarely reward) behaviour considered immoral. All morality is based on some religious/philosophical position or other. The only questions in a democracy is which moral values are embodied in law and which are practical to enforce.

It isn't possible to have a non-religious position. The dominant religion in the West at present is individualistic hedonism - that all that matters is the individual's pleasure and all other moralities have to be sacrificed to it. And they have no problem attempting to force their values on others and expecting others to subsidise them.

If you don't like society forcing its values on you - become a hermit - because everyone has to make concessions to the people and society around them.

At 7:45 PM, Blogger Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. said...

Furthermore Anonymous said:
"This isn’t a Uni assignment mate. Just because you made a Pratt of yourself over Jews made into soap, and gas chambers that didn’t exist, don’t start making up the rules as you go!!!"

Anyone has who thinks that Holocaust didn't happen has to ignore the the massive weight of historical evidence - including buildings, the eyewitness testimonies from not just Jews but homosexuals, socialists, POWs, liberating soldiers, and the confessions of Nazi officials, camp guards etc ; and the strange failure of Nazis at Nuremberg trials to mention any of these specious nonsense trotted out by 'revisionist historians'.

At 7:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not denying the holocuast. I simply stated that leading historians (including Jewish ones) now accpet that many parts of it are simply untrue.

Once you recognise that part of something is fiction, you must start to question the rest.

At 8:21 PM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

anonymous Ross,

You say these things Ross?

"I have 5 degrees including an MBA, and my IQ would get me into Mensa."

"I am bright enough (just) to see that history is one perspective of the truth."

"An MBA doesnt mean shit - i just paid money, sat in a classroom for a couple of years, wrote a few assignments."

"I did get mine (my MBA) from a very well respected university but its just a piece of paper."

"I got a few other degrees, (just more classes, more assignments), an Army Commission (hard fucking work), and a few other bits of paper."

"University – a wasted time. It only serves to allow others to measure the hoops you have jumped through."

I say: Ross, you should take your hand off your penis and stop rubbing it up and down.

At 8:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And I agree about religion!!! But we must stand and fight against ANY attempt to force the belief of some onto others.

Within 100 years Islam will be the dominant religion. Probably less. Will it affect me? Yes. Will it affect me any more that any other religion has? I doubt it.

It might surprise you to know that I have debated religion with Imams in the Middle East and Indonesia. They are not the simple fools we tend to think they are. They ask me questions like “is it true that the Catholic Church will not allow divorce?”. When I say yes, this is true, they use it as an argument that Islam is in fact far more advanced than Western religions…

They may well be right. Remember there is now a push to discredit Darwin and introduce some bunkum crap called Intelligent Design!!!

We now live in a society where probably 50% of the population is either agnostic or pays “lip service” to religion. I certainly don’t believe in the bible, Jesus being anything other than just another bloke, the divinity of the Pope or anyone else. I couldn’t give a shit if every church in the land was burned to the ground. Yet I am restricted to one wife due to religious pressure. My rights to euthanasia are restricted due to religious interference.

Unless WE can show that we are above such religious claptrap, we cannot argue against the rise of Islam. Cos its no better, and its no worse.

At 9:03 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Ross, why would you want more than one wife? Especially under the same roof?

First of all, you can't have more than one woman in charge, and we all like to be in charge. Next, add in the idea of cycles synching up.

It happens - if you have a group of women in close proximity for extended periods of times, then their hormonal cycles do eventually synchronise.

And they tend to synch in with the most dominant female.

PMS squared?

You really don't want to go there, although that could be the reason for 4.34.


At 9:21 PM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

"is it true that the Catholic Church will not allow divorce?”. When I say yes,"

Well, you would be wrong. The Catholic Church in Australia has no jurisdiction in divorce matters. It is within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.

“Yet I am restricted to one wife due to religious pressure.”

Unknown to you anonymous, you live in a society that has its roots in Judeo/Christian philosophy and our laws reflect that philosophical tradition. As you are an atheist, you should give us all an example of any society on the planet that has been shaped by an atheistic tradition and prospered.

Your apparent desire to find more than one brain dead female spouse is thwarted by the State parliaments of this country who prohibit polygamous relationships under their Crimes Acts.

Heavens knows what you did in all those degrees you claim. You certainly don't seem to have taken in anything of value.

You set up straw arguments that end in a nihilistic equivalence that leaves me breathless.

Islam is bad
Catholics are bad
Jews are even badder
Therefore all religions are bad and as such we cannot oppose Islam because we are bad too. Do you believe the shit you right or are you plain stupid?

At 9:28 PM, Blogger Nick and Nora Charles said...

Well Mr/Ms Anonymous I and II (I'm presuming there are two of you because your arguments are so schizophrenic, if you're going to make such sweeping generalisations about religion and Christianity in particular, I suggest you try this on for size:

Your brand of violent, virulent anti-religious rantings do very little to win us over to the virtues of atheism.

I will pray for you.

-- Nora

At 10:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Firstly, I do not want more than one wife. I have one that I love dearly.

However I object to religious bigots denying me the free choice to HAVE more than one wife. If I don’t subscribe to your church why should I have to live by its rules? Ahhhhh – the reason is that you think you know BETTER then I do (exactly the same thing that Muslims think!).

Nora. I have no desire to win anyone over to atheism,. Religion is a free choice. You must determine for yourself if you wish to believe in it or not.

Nora – your offer to pray for me is exactly what I object to. No doubt some pagan will offer to slaughter a goat for me. Praying, slaughtering, its all the same garbage as far as I am concerned. You are entitled to believe whatever you want. You can believe in a flat earth, Intelligent design, Jesus, the Bible, fairies, pixies, ghosts, whatever. Just don’t even think of forcing it upon me.

Let me say that again – DON’T FORCE YOUR IDEAS UPON ME!

(I notice you don’t like me even suggesting my ideas!!!)


Firstly, when people resort to insults it is a clear indication that they have lost. Don’t call me a wanker mate, either debate the points or shut up!

My education seems to fascinate you. As I have pointed out to you, it was a pretty worthless exercise. I don’t hold much store by it. It merely serves as a yardstick for others to measure me by.

Divorce: The Catholic Church has continually lobbied the Australian government for a tightening of divorce laws. The Australian Catholic Bishops conference of 1972 determined: “Christians should exercise their democratic rights vigorously to resist so-called "liberalisation" of the existing law, for example, to make civil divorce available at the request of husband and wife”.

Why should the Catholic Church be allowed to alter MY ability to obtain a divorce? Did I vote for the Pope?

You want an atheist society that does ok? JAPAN!!!!! (Ever been there? I am married to a Japanese girl!).

As for “living a society that has its roots in Judeo/Christian philosophy” – our current society has far deeper roots in Pagan beliefs than Christianity or Judaism. Or don’t you know the history of both religions?

It is NOT a straw argument to say that ANY religion that tries to impose its dogmatic beliefs upon others – either by religious conversion or by legislation, is an affront to the freedom of the individual.

Islam, Christianity, Judaism, are all bunkum ritualistic practices dreamed up by man. They are not the word of some supreme being!!!! It is just another loonie cult leader trying to get a bit of megalomaniac power.


At 10:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just for the record, since some of you seem to have lost the plot, let me lay it out in simple terms:

Many people are concerned about the coming of Islam and how it forces itself upon people.

But - as I have demonstrated, Christianity has forced itself upon people for almost 2000 years. It still DOES force its ideas and values upon people.

Many people are (quite rightly) concerned about the advent of Sharia Law.

But - as I have demonstrated, Christianity has no problems with forcing its own brand of laws upon a population.

My real worry, and a Soldier, is that you fucking idiots will provoke a war and I will then end up having to fight it for you…….

So - you accept Christianity, you should be fine with Islam. Just get into the habit of praying to Mecca 5 times a day (its no worse than having to go to Mass).

At 10:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Incidentally, i would ask, indeed BEG, all of you to read the following...

The implications should be obvious even to Nora!

At 11:27 PM, Blogger Caz said...

How very odd that people think that RU486 will be available over the counter. As far as I know that has never even been mooted, and I think it highly unlikely that any country would ever consider going down that path. This is medication to terminate an actual pregnancey. This is not the morning after pill, which is a "just in case" option, and literally has to be used within about 48 hrs of having sex, prior to confirmation of a potential conception. RU486 would only ever be available from a doctor, having discussed other options with the patient, and only if the relevant body does eventually approve it for use, which has not yet happened.

The risk with RU486 is very much more for women in rural and remote areas who may not have ready access to a GP for follow-ups, for example, or who may be reluctant to attend a local hostipital if she suspects something has gone wrong.

Anon - yes, you left out a lot of groups: obese people; heart patients; most cancer patients, etc, etc. Just about every health issue can now be attributed to "life style" choices, including every time we have a meal - pretty much any kind of food - so, forget your junkies and smokers - the latter are at least contributing more to the tax bucket than they take out in health costs.

As for this continuing carping that women should simply stop getting pregnant, good grief. You'd think that fertility and sex were the simplest things in the whole world to control. They're NOT. Medical science has not and will never produce the perfect contraceptive, and even if they did, not all people would use it, for whatever reasons they may have. It's called human behaviour; free will; life.

Life is basically about two things: sex and death. (Only one is a certainty and everyone wants to avoid it.)

Our abotrion rates are considered to be "high". Women in Australia have ready access to safe abortion, and because abortion is relatively legal, there is some data available on numbers (but not accurate). All this tells us is that if a country allows women access to legal, safe, cheap abortion they will exercise that option over & above other options. $50 million in counselling services will NOT change the abortion rates.

At 11:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Caz wrote: "$50 million in counselling services will NOT change the abortion rates".

No, but it will pay for a load of bigots to tell some poor girl that she is going to go to hell if she has an abortion....

Who exactly says our abortion rates are high? Oh yes - Pell and his mates!!!!!!!

At 12:12 AM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

anonymous Ross,

"You want an atheist society that does ok? JAPAN!!!!! (Ever been there? I am married to a Japanese girl!)."

You should talk to your wife more Ross. She might tell you that 84% of Japan's population observe both Shintoism and Buddhism.

See also “A Tapestry of Traditions: Japanese Religions” By Michael Pye

“The general pattern of Japanese rel-igion is in some ways a reflection of the country's geographical position and character. Japan has received a great deal from the Asian continent, but almost entirely from or via Korea and China. The major imported religions are therefore Buddhism, mainly in its Mahayana form, and Confucianism. The influence of Taoism, incidentally, has been large-ly indirect, bearing partly on divina-tion practices and partly on the style of Zen Buddhism. It was in reaction to the powerful Buddhist and Confu-cian systems, with their scholarly prestige and political influence, that Japan's native Shinto faith first became clearly organized and defined. Indeed, the impact of Chin-ese and then of Western culture, and Japan's responses to these, provide the overall cultural perspective in which Japanese religion can be understood.”

For a bunch of atheists the Japanese seemed to have worshipped a lot of deities over the millennia.

“our current society has far deeper roots in Pagan beliefs than Christianity or Judaism. Or don’t you know the history of both religions?”

Given that Pagans were polytheists it is hard to understand your point. Our western societies owe nothing, which I can think of, to paganism. Our values are based on the two books of the Jewish and Christian religions. The Ten Commandments are from the Old Testament (Jewish) and are an intrinsic part of Christian belief.

The history of western thought is inextricably enmeshed with Jewish and Christian religious rinciples, not paganism. Australia, a western society, was created by people who were the products of Judeo/Christian philosophy.

The following words of Jesus seem to encapsulate the separation of Church and State pretty accurately.

“Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Mark 12:17

You seem to be arguing that you object to a theocracy speaking on your behalf. Your thoughts are all over the shop. Merely because those who have a religion put their views, on social issues in a democracy, is not the same as forcing their views upon you. If you follow the logic of what you seem to be saying, only people of no religious conviction would be entitled to express a point of view. As I’ve implied, atheists have done bugger all for western society and as a social/political movement (Communism) have killed millions of people and contributed nothing good that will endure.

And this:

“Many people are (quite rightly) concerned about the advent of Sharia Law.

But - as I have demonstrated, Christianity has no problems with forcing its own brand of laws upon a population.”

This is pure left wing equivalence excuse making for Islam. There is no equivalence between the two. Sharia law is Islamic Law - our laws are based on Judeo/Christian values and are anathema to Sharia law.

Western Governments do not enforce Christian laws, or Jewish laws for that matter, on us, as you allege. Our parliamentary structures, our history, our judiciary and our conventions derive from the Judeo/Christian philosophical tradition. Not from paganism.

And finally this,

“My real worry, and a Soldier, is that you fucking idiots will provoke a war and I will then end up having to fight it for you…….”

My real worry is that I think you must be referring to our military in which you say you are a soldier.

God help us!

At 1:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

1) Japan:
Japanese have truly prognostic approach to belief. Rather like throwing salt over your shoulder, they enjoy the ritualistic parts of some beliefs. Many follow traditions of Shinto and Buddhist – rather as many Australians follow Christmas, with no regard to it being a religious festival….

The one thing they did worship was the Emperor – until the end of WW2.

I was actually married in Japan. The only recognize civil ceremonies.

Like most things, you have to live there to understand it. I could post you some interesting links, but they are in Japanese. Can you read Japanese?

2) Christian Values:
It is utter bollocks to say “Our values are based on the two books of the Jewish and Christian religions. The Ten Commandments are from the Old Testament (Jewish) and are an intrinsic part of Christian belief”. Our values owe far more to Greek and Roman pre Christian history, and to various Pagan beliefs. These early values were hijacked by newer religions and incorporated in its teachings. Values existed in pre Christian times. The same values. They are societal values, not religious ones

Do you not understand this? Do you think the world started when some moron sat down and started writing the bible?

3) Religious dictatorship:
I have no objection to “those who have a religion putting their views on social issues in a democracy”. I object to lobbying, and laws being created, to support the teachings of that religion.

Q: Can you please tell me why I am allowed only one wife? What logical reason exists? DON’T quote me the bible, or mumbo jumbo. Give me one logical reason based upon fact!

4) Separation of Church and State:
As for: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's”.

(More mumbo jumbo…..)

Many of our current laws originated in ecclesiastical courts. In the Middle Ages these courts had wide powers, and were acknowledged to be the experts in The Corpus Juris Civilis (Body of Civil Law). Thus many of the laws today were based upon the Churches interpretation of Roman Laws. The interpretation of course, always suited the teaching of the church……..

But of course you knew that didn’t you?

At 1:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And, for your information, I am an Officer in the Australian Army Reserve. I’m not a particularly good officer, but I put the time in – I average about 70 days a year in uniform. It costs me lot of lost pay, and I miss my wife. But I think I owe something to society.

You can take the piss if you wish. I expect nothing less.

At 1:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chapter 125 of the Book of the Dead (the Papyrus of Ani) includes a list of things to which a man must swear in order to enter the afterlife. These sworn statements bear a remarkable resemblance to the Ten Commandments in their nature and their phrasing. These statements include "not have I defiled the wife of man," "not have I committed murder," "not have I committed theft," "not have I lied," "not have I cursed god," "not have I borne false witness," and "not have I abandoned my parents." This of course predates the Bible, and rather shoots your argument.

Feel that stuff running down your face….. that’s EGG mate!!!!

At 8:03 AM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...


You are an idiot. I will waste no more of my time on you.

At 8:41 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

Ross, the biggest problem with atheism or secularism as belief systems is that they do not acknowledge any higher moral authority.

Regardless of who you are worshipping, there is some consolation that at least the major laws tend to be universal.

If we look at communism, Stalin did not acknowledge any authority higher than himself, and look at what he accomplished. The same with Chairman Mao.

Castro is another one who runs the show according to his lights, rather than a set of beliefs apparently decreed from on high.

While christianity may have taken from pagan rituals a la easter and the like, this does not detract from the Gospel according to Jesus. He is the Way, and that's pretty much it.

(Any scholars can feel free to kick my backside on this one.)

At 8:46 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

Just briefly on polygamy, speaking as a woman, I find it offensive in the extreme as a practise. I don't care whether you are muslim, pagan or mormon. Or even atheistic.

How demeaning to tell me that I am not worthy of a man's undivided commitment. If I have to share the man in my life, what does he have to supply in recompense for the insult to my worth as a person? Nothing.

Sorry, I'm worth more than that. Any bloke who thinks it should be okay to have more than one woman while he's got me around can sod off now.

That's my personal opinion.

For something a bit more considered, there's a wonderful piece by William Tucker that puts it much better than I ever could over at Jerusalem Summit.

Polygamy is cultural suicide.

At 9:51 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

youcancallmemeyer said...
"anonymous, You are an idiot. I will waste no more of my time on you."

Allow me to translate that:

youcancallmemeyer actualy said...
"anonymous, you are right:

1) I was completely wrong about the origins of our modern societal values, which I now accept have been in existence since at least the Book of the Dead. I was completely wrong to suggest that they only commenced with the Old Testament.

2) I was also wrong about Japan not being an atheist state. I have never been there, and had no idea what I was talking about. I was not aware that the majority of Japanese actually follow neo Confucianism, introduced by the tokugawa government in 17th century to give its government ethical credence.

3) I was also wrong about Western Governments enforcing Christian laws. I was not aware of the impact of ecclesiastical courts of the Middle Ages had upon our current laws. I now accept that the Church of the day deliberately misinterpreted roman Laws to ensure that its own dogmatic ideology was enshrined in law.

4) I cannot explain why you are only allowed one wife by law.

But hey – why apologise Meyer! Far better to just lower yourself to insults again eh mate….

At 10:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nilk/Leeianne said...
Just briefly on polygamy, speaking as a woman, I find it offensive in the extreme as a practice.

But that is not the point. My question is: Why is it not allowed by law?
No one has been able to answer the question for me, in 30 years of asking. All I get is religious mumbo jumbo about Gods word!
Laws against incest are firmly based upon genetics, laws against pedophilia are based upon the intellectual development rates of young people. What scientific principle lies behind the law allowing one wife?

At 11:01 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some of you might be surprised to lean that I am very active in attempting to keep Fundamental Islam at bay. I will attach a brief outline of what is happening in Indonesia, just to give you something to think about.

However, almost as concerning as the rise of fundamental Islam, is the rise of fundamental Christianity. I am not fighting one religious dogma just to see another one slip in through the side door! I want to prevent Iran 1980, or Afghanistan 1996, from happening to good people in Indonesia. I am not fighting to convert the place to Christianity.

Indonesia – The beginning of the end;

Indonesia is ostensibly a secular state, with separation between religion and government. The country is the largest single Islamic population in the world, about 88% of its 250 million population are Muslim, with 5% protestant, 3% Roman Catholic etc. Interestingly it is illegal (in theory) to have no religion in Indonesia.

In recent years Indonesia has become a target for radical Islamists, who are trying to remove the secular state, and replace it with Sharia Law. They have already succeeded in Nanggroe Ache Darussalem, where the law has been in place since early 2000, and public canings for transgressors are not uncommon.

Indonesia went to the polls on April 5th 2004, having modified its electoral rules substantially in 2003. Partly due to these changes, the number of moderates in the Lower House and Senate have dramatically decreased, tipping the balance of power to the far right wing of the conservatives. As well as that, the appointment of the Vice President Yusuf Kalla has substantially tighten the grip of the right wing faction. The VP was well known for his strong views on Islam.

Two West Java Regencies, Cianju and Tasikmalaya, have now (Jan 2006) started new ‘familiarisation” of Sharia Law. This involves “educating” women on the need to wear headscarves in public etc. It also requires proof of knowledge of the Koran for successful high school graduation.

This process of “Sharia by Stealth” is now picking up speed. In Bandung, about 3 hours out of Jakarta, 25 Christian Churches were forced to close in 2005. In Tangerang, a satellite city of jaakrta, the local government have just (Jan 2006) banned the sale of food during Prayer times on Friday.

All overseas news broadcasts are now banned. No CNN, ABC, BBC news footage can be shown, lest it shows Islam in a bad light.

In Batam, the police have this month (Feb 2006) started approaching girls in short skirts and warning them about dressing ‘provocatively”. They are also attempting to force shops to stop selling the clothing.

In Jakarta itself, the sale of alcohol in supermarkets is now forbidden by new laws introduced late last year. Clubs and bars are constantly being raided by the police, always accompanied by members of the Islamic Defenders Front (who themselves in turn are accompanied by Middle Eastern gentlemen). Unaccompanied girls are taken away for “re-education”. Any girl who doesn’t wear a headscarf or who is drinking alcohol is considered to be at moral risk.

The latest move, a new national law expected to be passed in June, introduces far reaching restrictions. Couples who kiss in public can be sentenced to five years in jail. All “tight” or “revealing” womens clothing is banned. Anyone wearing a short skirt, tight jeans or exposing a midriff can expect being hauled away for re-education, or face 5 years in jail.

These laws apply to all people, not just Muslims, and apply to all of Indonesia, including Bali. Any Australian girl wearing a bikini on a beach risks time in a Balinese jail. Any Australian man who kisses his wife on a street in Bali can expect up to 5 years in a foreign jail.

It is interesting to note how the imposition of this Sharia law has been done surreptitiously. The laws are being introduced to “stem moral decline”, and no mention is made of the Islamic implications.

This is exactly how Islam is spreading itself all over the world. Islam by stealth.

In the UK 4 out of 10 Muslims want Sharia law introduced.

In 2005 a Muslim deputation petitioned Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs Minister Peter McGauran for a separate Islamic court in Australia to deal specifically with Islamic divorces.


At 11:33 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

Ross, I'm with you on the sharia by stealth situation, but we can only fight on one front.

Fundy christianity is really a red herring, I believe.

First of all, it seems to be on the increase in response to the increase in muslim jihadi activity. Because of the religious component of jihad, a lot of people are looking at their faith and either finding it for the first time, or becoming vocal about it.

Secondly, the christian churches are undergoing constant evolution. The Reformation did not take place in a specific segment of history. It is ongoing.

I converted to catholicism when I was in my early 20s, but it was never something I discussed with people. I had friends who knew me for several years before they realised that I went to mass. I have always considered it a personal relationship between myself and God.

But when something comes along and uses my faith as an excuse to cow me, I won't be sitting silently by. If that means that I speak up on the side of the christian churches, I will.

The bible is not going to tell people that I should be beheaded.

The bible does not suggest that apostasy be fixed in a somewhat terminal manner.

The bible does not relegate me to unclean status.

The quran does all this.

Christians are the least of our worries, and their are worse things to live with than a God who loves you and expects you to make your own choices and wear the consequences.

How many wars do you want to fight?

At 11:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just in case anyone is confused by Meyers comments on religion in Japan, let me quote from John Lowes book ‘Into Japan” (ISBN 0-88162-162-5)

Page 45:

“People traveling around Japan are struck by the number of Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples everywhere, with many small shrines along the streets. If they enter a Japanese home they will probably see a small Buddhist altar with an offering of rice for the ancestors, and a domestic Shinto shrine. If they are in Japan for one of the great festivals such as new Year, they will see Japanese flocking to the neighbourhood shrine. They may be confused to see that many Buddhist temples contain Shinto shrines, and some shrines contain Buddhist objects.

From these observations people make two reasonable assumptions. First they conclude that the Japanese are religious people, even if following two obviously separate religions is perplexing. Secondly they assume that these two religions must exercise a deep influence on Japanese society.

I think that neither Shintoism nor Buddhism exercise any influence on Japanese society. The dominant ethical influence remains the Confucianism that the tokugawa government adopted and developed in the 17th century to underpin their political policy, now called neo-Confucianism.”

That presents a pretty accurate picture of religion in Japan….

Incidentally, Christianity arrived in Japan in with Portuguese Jesuits in 1549, who promptly set about converting the population to ‘their” religion. By 1600 half a million Japanese were Christian. The arrival of Dutch and English missionaries in 1613 bought Catholic-Protestant rivalries, and by 1614 the tokagawea government had banned Christianity and thrown all missionaries out. (Pity the rest of the world didn’t follow the idea!!!!!!!)

At 12:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nilk/Leeianne said...
"Ross, I'm with you on the sharia by stealth situation, but we can only fight on one front.

Fundy christianity is really a red herring, I believe."


I dont want to allow one stupid religion to be usurped by another one that restricts abortion, Stem Cell research, euthanasia etc.

Faced with that, I would rather allow Islam to take its course. the challenge is out to Christianity. move into modern times, or move onto the scrapheap.

At 12:42 PM, Anonymous meredith said...

Nilknarf comments:
"Ross, the biggest problem with atheism or secularism as belief systems is that they do not acknowledge any higher moral authority."

I am Atheist and I totally agree, I find it very sad most Atheists seem more embittered at society/authority/God/Christians/bible or the church. It's often an angry rejective stance at failed or let down experience with religion to call ones self an Atheist.

As an Atheist, the nihilist "I hate God" in the Atheist and Secular communities is so embarrassing for me lol. I find general they are either actually new agers trying to legislate their idealism, or just so angry at how unfair life naturally is they are making it hard for us all.

I believe Atheist is a belief system. Simply there is no afterlife or higher powered being, hence to be bitter at God is a contradiction. On saying this I firmly think humans tend towards some type of "religious or moral expression" for me its heroes, Winston Churchill and my Grandfather.

At 1:10 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

I dont want to allow one stupid religion to be usurped by another one that restricts abortion, Stem Cell research, euthanasia etc.

Faced with that, I would rather allow Islam to take its course. the challenge is out to Christianity. move into modern times, or move onto the scrapheap.

Ross, christianity is on the move, as is islam.

Islam is regressing, no two ways about it. It does not have any strategy for dealing with the modern world outside of "kill, crush, destroy."

At the risk of repeating myself, christians are not out there bombing each other back into the stone age as is happening in Iraq.

Christians are not hanging women for defending themselves (since the men are obviously incapable of doing that).

Regarding abortion, stem cell treatments, and euthanasia:

I am against legislating euthanasia - it is the thin edge of the wedge and becomes a state-approved tool to rid yourself of an unwanted person. It's human nature.

Adult stem cells, no problemo. Embryonic stem cells I have a large problem. People are not commodities, and easy access to abortion, embryonic stem cell studies, euthanasia, all reduce people to something less than the sum of their parts.

I will not live in a utilitarian world.

You need to consider exactly how much freedom you wish to live with. None under sharia or some under a judeo/christian framework which can be further developed in the future.

Ross, before long, you aren't going to have any choice. You know that, I know that. Look at your posting above about sharia by stealth.

I don't see christian fundamentalism by stealth. It's all out in the open, and the gays, feminists, atheists, anarchists, socialist et al are all fighting it and making plenty of fuss about it.

All the while allowing dawa and taqiyya to work their charms and soften us up for the hard jihad to come.

At 1:25 PM, Blogger James Ozark said...

"Can you please tell me why I am allowed only one wife? What logical reason exists? DON’T quote me the bible, or mumbo jumbo. Give me one logical reason based upon fact!"

Okay - off the top of my head:

1. To promote genetic diversity.

2. So your community's young men aren't left with a relatively small (and possibly shrinking) pool of women from which to try to select a mate.

Footloose (and mateless), these single men form a reserve of frothing hormones without vent - well, almost without vent. . .

Sound familiar?

China is heading into similar territory (though not as a result of polygamy).

At 1:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Christianity is regressing:

Abortion laws have tightened in 36 US states in the last 10 years.

In some states applicants are required BY LAW to look at ultrasound images of the fetus. In others BY LAW they have to undergo counseling.
Doctors performing abortions have been murdered by “pro lifers”.
Abortion clinics have to use armed security staff.
People going into the clinic are threatened and abused.

That is not progression, its regression!!!!!!

I respect your choice not to live in a utilitarian world. But what about MY CHOICE?

(or don’t I count)

At 2:00 PM, Blogger Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. said...

No you don't. Heretics have no rights.

At 2:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And isnt that just the truth.....

Whait till them Muslims get you mate, you might be singing a different song.... :)

At 3:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh – and Meyer can stick the following up his clacker (since he thinks Christianity did not rise out of Paganism):
In Ad 325, the Roman Catholic Church was created by a pagan emperor named Constantine. It was only superficially a Christian Church. The First Nicean Council was assembled to work out the details. While it was supposed to have been made up of Christian elders from five major Christian centers (Rome, Athens, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch), it also included elders of all the major PAGAN religions of Rome. Bishops from the cults of Mithras, Tammuz, Oannes (Dagon), Ceres, Janus, Bacchus, Apollo, Osiris, Jupiter, and Constantine's own religion: Sol Invictus, were invited. It was Constantine's wish that all of the Pagan religions, then at odds with each other, creating unnecessary conflicts, be unified into one "Catholic" church. "Catholic" means universal. The proceedings of that council were conducted by Constantine with an iron hand, and one of the positions which he insisted upon, and got, was to make Pistis a doctrine of the new church. Gnosticism could not be tolerated, because it encouraged its members to question authority. Pistis was thus politically expedient, because it forbade questioning.
The institution of the papacy was built on the doctrine of being the successors of St. Peter as Bishop of Rome, and the first bishop. History, however, does not show Peter to have been in Rome, or to have ever been a bishop, anywhere. The first bishop of Rome was listed as Linus. "Peter of Rome" took the place of the Pet-Roma, the "Book of Stone" which played a major part in initiation into the Eleusinian Mysteries. The statue of Jupiter (Jo-Peter) in Rome came to be worshipped as the image of Peter, with the claim that it always had been the image of Peter.


The philosophers of the ancient world were the masters of Spiritual Truth. They were mystics not researchers. The great Greek philosopher Pythagoras, for example, is remembered today for his mathematical work, but few people know him as he actually was—a mystic who many believed was able to still the winds and raise the dead.
At the heart of the Mysteries were myths concerning a dying savior/gad who was resurrected. This savior/god was known by many different names. He is who the great mythologist Joseph Campbell called "The Hero of a Thousand Faces." In Egypt he was Osiris, in Greece Dionysus, in Asia Minor Attis, in Syria Adonis, in Italy Bacchus, in Persia Mithras. all these myths are telling the story of the same mythical being.. Many scholars use the combined name Osiris-Dionysus when referring to this specific Mystery tradition.
From the fifth century BC philosophers such as Xenophanes and Empedodes were concerned that many people were taking the stories of the gods and goddesses as literally true. They knew that they were allegories of human spiritual experiences. The myths of Osiris-Dionysus are not be understood as historical tales, but as a symbolic narratives which encode the mystical teachings of the Ancient Wisdom. Because of this, although the details were developed and adapted over time by different cultures, the myth of Osiris-Dionysus has remained essentially the same.
The various myths of the different savior/gods of the Ancient Mysteries share what the Joseph Campbell called “the same anatomy.” With these different myths it is possible to see both their uniqueness and fundamental sameness. On the face of it they look very different, yet they are essentially the same story of the savior/god of the Pagan Mysteries.
The more you study the various versions of the myth of Osiris-Dionysus, the more it will became obvious that the story of Jesus has all the characteristics of this perennial tale. Event by event, Jesus’ supposed biography was constructed from mythic motifs previously relating to Pagan gods and saviors. They are:
¶ Osiris-Dionysus is God made flesh, the savior and “Son of God.”
¶ His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.
¶ He is born in a cave or stable on December 25 before three shepherds.
¶ He offers his followers the chance to be born again through the rites of baptism.
¶ He miraculously turns water into wine at a marriage ceremony.
¶ He rides triumphantly into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honor him.
¶ He dies at Easter-time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
¶ After his death he descends to hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.
¶ His followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
¶ His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and wine, which symbolize his body and blood
The Origins of Jesus
Anthropologically, there have always been myths and legends of "saviors" - a suffering god. Osiris, god of ancient Egypt, died and was resurrected in a myth that may be as much as ten thousand years old. Tammuz was a mid-eastern god who died on the cross and was resurrected on the third day.
There was never any single individual who was the Jesus portrayed in the New Testament. The mythical Jesus is constructed of many elements from the religions of the Roman empire. Chief among these are: 1)Joshua ben Pandera, the second Messiah of the Zealot movement. The Gospel of Mark was likely built around his life story. 2) an itinerant Essene teacher who was killed during an All Fools’ Day celebration in Alexandria about 28 AD, and 3) the sacrificial hero of Middle-Eastern mythology.

At 8:43 PM, Blogger Caz said...

James - not only China; in India they are aborting the female fetus at a startling rate, and that's without any breeding limits influencing the decisions.

It's a serious matter, not just for what it says about the value society places on girls and women, but for the lack of thought to the long term consequences for any society with not enough women for the number of young men. In those circumstances men are known to be more aggressive, more violent, and alienated. Not being able to find a wife and have a family has a very negative effect on men. In countries the size of China and India, it only takes a couple of percent deficit in what SHOULD have been the number of baby girls born to ensure that millions of men a couple of decades hence will never have a wife. This has already been happening for several decades now, so the social conseqences are starting to hit.

Correcting the gross imbalance is no simple thing either; fewer women, means even fewer babies, so the problem will be compounded from one generation to the next.

At 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another win for the bigots:

S.D. Governor Signs Abortion Ban Into Law By CHET BROKAW, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 35 minutes ago

PIERRE, S.D. - Gov. Mike Rounds signed legislation Monday banning nearly all abortions in South Dakota, setting up a court fight aimed at challenging the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

The bill would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless the procedure was necessary to save the woman's life. It would make no exception for cases of rape or incest.

Planned Parenthood, which operates the state's only abortion clinic, in Sioux Falls, has pledged to challenge the measure.

Rounds issued a written statement saying he expects the law will be tied up in court for years and will not take effect unless the U.S. Supreme Court upholds it.

"In the history of the world, the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them," Rounds said in the statement.

The governor declined all media requests for interviews Monday.

The Legislature passed the bill last month after supporters argued that the recent appointment of conservative justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito have made the U.S. Supreme Court more likely to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Abortion opponents already are offering money to help the state pay legal bills for the anticipated court challenge, Rounds has said. Lawmakers said an anonymous donor has pledged $1 million to defend the ban, and the Legislature set up a special account to accept donations for legal fees.

Under the new law, to go into effect July 1, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion.

Rounds noted that it was written to make sure existing restrictions would still be enforced during the legal battle. Current state law sets increasingly stringent restrictions on abortions as pregnancy progresses; after the 24th week, the procedure is allowed only to protect the woman's health and safety.

Kate Looby, state director of Planned Parenthood, said the organization has not yet decided whether to challenge the measure in court or to seek a statewide public vote in November. A referendum would either repeal the abortion ban or delay a court challenge to the legislation.

"Obviously, we're very disappointed that Governor Rounds has sided on the side of politics rather than on the side of the women of South Dakota to protect their health and safety," Looby said.

She said Planned Parenthood would continue providing services that include family planning, emergency contraception and safe and legal abortions.

About 800 abortions are performed each year in the state.

At 3:48 PM, Blogger NH said...

Doesn't take much to fire people up, does it? Religion! How can you take any of them seriously?

Excellent post, incidentally.

At 9:39 AM, Blogger Jai Normosone said...

(I wrote this big reply in response and it seems to be me who has lost the plot on the topic :) Ya get that.... (where the hell did I get the idea that it was about the RU486 drug then? Duh..... time for more coffee.... :)

I have opposition to the RU486 drug but it isn't based on religious grounds.

When this drug was being touted around the US media sometime around 1997 or so, I was having similar discussions with a friend of mine. She was pretty open about the menstrual cycle and how it worked, etc etc. Just because there is some red stuff there, people go "icky poo" and don't want to know any more. Why? It is a part of the life of the person who may be most important to you. If, as a bloke, you can make life easier for a woman for that week or so, it does reap rewards for you in the sense of life being easier to cope with. OK, so this won't apply to all women but I live in hope that it will for the one that finally accepts me :)

Anyway - I was told then that this drug forces an immediate period thereby "cleaning out the pipes" and it didn't matter where in her cycle that the woman was. THIS is the thing I have a problem with. Is it just me or does this (need a woman to answer here) cause a major imbalance in the body? I was also told way back then that it takes many months for the body to resume normal cyclic behaviour.

From where I stand: I would object to a woman that I was emotionally attached to subjecting her body to that sort of punishment. When I actually find one, I'd kinda like to hang onto her for a while.

I was quite amazed how the replies to this post got completely derailed and descended into a religious discussion. Religious belief does play a part in whether the drug should be used or not on a theoretical level and the preservation of life, etc etc - but the physiological aspects are at the centre of this discussion in my eyes.

Besides, when it comes down to it - I would never ask a woman to take this drug should it ever become available but I would like to think that I would sure as hell know that she was informed about what it would do to her body before she did it. In the end, it is her body and her decision (in those very, very early stages anyway).

Japan: I always had the understanding that Nagasaki was predominantly Catholic as well. Apparently there were some very ornate churches there until a B17 said "hello" in it's own unique way.

Army: An 'Officer' in the army? Yeah - 'nuff said. I'm an army brat and I grew up under Sergeants and Warrant Officers. The officers I knew were flat out knowing their arse from their elbow. Saying that, I was going to go to Duntroon and become an officer myself but was rejected (eyes and later, spine (car accident). Good thing, too - I have too many mates that are physical and mental cripples thanks to the lack of care provided to veterans.

Polygamy: While nature for seemingly every other creature condones and encourages this practice, for humans it seems to have evolved with civilisation (term used loosely) to be a one-on-one. I know little about the history but I would suggest that it came about to prevent accidental inbreeding.

Last bit: going on what I know about Nilknarf, anyone who wins her heart should never need to look any further. Quite unique :)

At 1:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

But surely jai - every drug causes an imbalance to the body? Shouldn’t we really ban all drugs. Asprin – banned etc.

RU586 – I wouldn’t ask a woman to take it. But I would not stop a woman either. But then again, I am not Catholic.

Duntroon – you didn’t miss much. Horrible place. I still have nightmares about that parade ground. I hold an MBA and 3 other degrees. Complete waste of time compared to what I learned at Duntroon.

At 2:21 PM, Blogger Jai Normosone said...

True - anything foreign to the body has an effect - it just depends on the resultant damage.

I'm not catholic either - I'm not really an anything and I think that for myself to select a religion would be a backwards step. I don't know how the earth was created - I don't know if there is one god or many gods or a committee drinking Starbucks - or none. These questions in my life cannot ever be answered by some git with a skullcap or a turban or a bloke in a dress or one offering "special" kool-aid. There are some things I will never know BUT some people *do* believe and I will happily listen to what they have to say provided, like you say, that it doesn't get rammed down my throat.
I generally have no problem with door-knockers and such as they don't deserve derision. I just tell myself that they have obviously not found their goal in life if they think that they need to convert everyone else.

I say to pick the best bits out of each religion or belief structure and put together a plan in your head about how you would like to be as a person. I firmly believe in the treating people how you like to be treated and I also believe that if you live right and brush your teeth at least once a day, everything will work out OK.
That being said, it also means NOT burying your head in the sand to the dangers in our lives.

Parallels can be drawn between Catholicism and Islam and they have each been responsible for many deaths in the past but history is history and the major threat to the relatively free way of life we have now is Islam. Ignorant, infantile, unemployable zealots who consider all others to be 2nd class citizens.
Catholicism, Buddhism, Shinto, Judaism, etc etc etc., do not or no longer preach to conquer non-believers.

I don't know if Allah is the same god as that which Christians and Jews believe in and if there is any overlap to Hinduism and Shinto - but I will state that Mohammed was a male who practiced paedophilia and even for that alone, I say he is a FALSE prophet and everyone who follows his 'teachings' is a fool.

What these clowns don't realise is that, essentially, a god is a god - an omnipotent being. If they can create heaven and earth and life and such then they can eradicate that life as well. Why send an insignificant child-rapist to kill all and convert them to his/her way of thinking when the god can do it with minimal effort? Unless of course the entire belief system is a lie. Hands up all those who think that Mohammed was a liar and a conman? ("ME! ME! ME!")

It's true that the same could be said of Jesus but at least his method involved accepting those with differing views for who they are and treating them with respect rather than senseless murder.

I don't even know for sure that such a bloke ever existed but the message is still valid.

At 6:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course he exists. The Church says so, and they wouldnt lie to me. Would they?

At 10:40 PM, Blogger Jai Normosone said...

You tell me.... would they?

I don't know when someone lies to me - they just better not be in striking distance when I find them out though.

That's also why we develop our own internal bullshit meter. If a false prophet (peace be upon him) turns out to be a false prophet (peace be upon him) is he still a false prophet (peace be upon him) or just a bullshit-artist? (oh yeah... peace be upon him)

There are many lies and many liars in society and down through history. Since we can't deal with all of them, we need to take care of the big ones first and then address the smaller ones.
(peace be upon him)

Death threats? What death threat?? What cartoon? Honest... I don't have a pigs head in my backyard with a turban shaped like a bomb on her & a set of eye-glasses reading a book about the life of a paedophile and dripping snot and blood on it. I don't! Really, I don't! >:)
(peace be upon him)
Oh, and a bit of dogshit too....
(peace be upon him)

At 9:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thats the thing with religion. they never say anything you can catch them out on......


Post a Comment

<< Home