Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Is abortion child abuse?

I was passing a church today and noticed their display of 4,000 little white crosses and their sign that said "Abortion the Ultimate Child Abuse".  I had to stop and wonder why they didn't have crosses and a sign about the "murder" and "disposal" yearly of millions of fertilized eggs by the in-vitro fertilization clinics?  If one uses the reasoning that a sperm and an egg combined is "sacred" and a "human life", then shouldn't they be making couples who use in-vitro labs feel guilty?  Under this reasoning aren't in-vitro lab technicians guilty of murder and "child abuse" as well?  Have we as americans forgotten how to use reason and logic and science? Is the church peddling a heavy dose of guilt upon a woman who has made a difficult choice?  I had to comtemplate and step back and wonder about the 1/3 of all pregnancies that are "miscarried".  Whose will is it that that potential child was lost?  Is god to blame?   At the very least god is guilty for "allowing" a miscarriage or an ectopic pregnancy?  Is he not powerful enough to "save a life and preserve a pregnancy to full term"?  Logical "faith based" thinking would deduce that god allowed or "caused" a miscarriage and is equal in guilt to an "abortionist", or maybe more so, as far more pregnancies are lost to miscarriage than to abortion.  Has the church stopped to consider that a significant number of those abortions were performed to save the life of the mother?  Should a woman feel guilty for saving her own life?  Pregnancy causes 500,000 deaths yearly in america.  It is not a condition that is without risk.  Does a woman who is saving her own life feel guilty for "this so-called ultimate child abuse".  A fetus does not have a developed brain or nervous system and cannot feel pain before 24 weeks.  How is removing a fetus from a uterus child abuse?  A zygote and blastocyte does not have any way of "knowing, feeling, and being aware of pain" is removing a pregnancy in those stages child abuse?  Is any of this logical?  NO.  The display is an act of religious dogma that targets women and girls with the intention of applying a layer of guilt to their psyche and emotions.  To an ignorant populace who has expended logic and replaced dogma with guilt the anti-abortion sign will be accepted "as fact".  It isn't fact.  The dislplay is a  a display of self righteous dogma devoid of reason to force a public debate to their personal (not biblical)  positions of morality.  If they want their wives, sisters and mother's to die from an unsafe be it...but leave the public well enough alone.  How many children are actually abused everyday?  As a child that was abused and risked death daily just by waking and breathing I can tell anyone who would care to listen about child abuse....I barely survived childhood.  The unwanted children of unwanted pregnancies are the real everyday potential victims of child abuse...not the act of removing a glob of cells from a woman's uterus!!!  Sperm and eggs are not sacred.  A human that is living and breathing as it's own "outside" of the mother is a human life.  Denial of food, shelter and love of a baby that is breathing and living outside the womb of a mother is child abuse....not an abortion!  Leave women alone and let them decide when a pregnancy is safe and prudent. 

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Mary Magdalene and Jesus and Easter Morning

The following is an article by Loretta Kimsley about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, who may have been his wife and lover.

"I read…the sto­ry of the great­est morn in his­to­ry: “The first day of the week com­eth Ma­ry Mag­da­lene ear­ly, while it was yet ve­ry dark, unto the se­pul­cher.” In­stant­ly, com­plet­ely, there un­fold­ed in my mind the scenes of the gar­den of Jo­seph….Out of the mists of the gar­den comes a form, halt­ing, he­si­tat­ing, tear­ful, seek­ing, turn­ing from side to side in be­wil­der­ing amaze­ment. Fal­ter­ing­ly, bear­ing grief in ev­e­ry ac­cent, with tear-dimmed eyes, she whis­pers, “If thou hast borne him hence”… “He speaks, and the sound of His voice is so sweet the birds hush their sing­ing.” Je­sus said to her, “Mary!” Just one word from his lips, and for­got­ten the heart­aches, the long drea­ry hours….all the past blot­ted out in the pre­sence of the Liv­ing Pre­sent and the Eter­nal Fu­ture."

So wrote Aus­tin Miles in March 1912. Miles was the author of my favorite hymn, In The Garden. When I was a child, I did not know it was about Mary Magdalene or the depth of the role she played in the life of Yeshua.

In The Garden is the story of their meeting in the garden after his resurrection. It's refrain is simple, deep and filled with love:

And He walks with me, and He talks with me,

And He tells me I am His own;

And the joy we share as we tarry there,

None other has ever known.

None other...that speaks of a special love as does his choice of her to be the first witness to his resurrection. In The Dialogue of the Savior, a Gnostic text that was discovered in 1945 in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, Mary Magdalene is termed The Woman Who Knew The All.

But what is The All? It isn't what we're taught in church on Sunday.

I've long known that what was translated as Kingdom of Heaven would have been Queendom of Heaven in Aramaic. Maldukah, a feminine word, refers to the lower circle of the Tree of Life in Kabbalah, a sefirot related to Shekinah and expressed in Jewish tradition in feminine terms. The Greek term for kingdom is Basilia, which means "basis" and that was the word used to translate the passage into Greek.

Even so, when I found these two references, I was surprised to have the Queendom to be directly related to Mary Magdalene and The All.

From The Hidden Gospel: Decoding the Spiritual Message of the Aramaic Jesus by Neil Douglas-Klotz

...They [male disciples like Peter] had to keep asking what things meant and really held tight to the idea of a physical kingdom in this world versus what Magdalene understood by the 'Queendom is within' which is actually the literal translation of the Aramaic 'the Kingdom is within'. The term malduka speaks to Queen and not King...

.Seeking the Kingdom by Savitr Ishaya is a long and wonderfully written article about our oneness with The All. I pulled out a paragraph to use as highlight but to understand fully, the entire article should be read:

The Aramaic word we translate as "kingdom" is malkutah, or 0tuklm (Ah-T-K-L-M); the word we read as "heaven" is shemaya, or 0ym4 (Ah-Y-M-Sh ); and the word that Jesus always uses for "God" in this particular context is Alaha, or 0hl0. (Ah-H-L-Ah). If we could imagine a western-style Grammar based on the Hebrew alphabet, it would be correct to say that the meaning of a word is presaged, or foreshadowed, by the meaning of its first letter. The first letter of malkutah is Meem (m), which is an extremely feminine letter and which, at the beginning of a word, refers to a very proximate reality. Moving directly to the patterns formed by the individual root letters, we find the following: M-L = A full, or completely formed, expression; K-T = Envelopment, mystery, a hiding place; and Ah (Alap) by itself, meaning God, Sacred Unity, The All that gives birth to the all..

So The All is Sacred Unity. We do not need a historical and agonizing blood sacrifice to be part of The All because we are already part of The All. The All is the queendom we find within and that exists around us.

In this context, Yeshua's relationship with Mary Magdalene is clear and very understandable. Margaret Starbird writes extensively about their relationship and their expression of The Sacred Union. On my Mary Magdalene discussion list, Margaret recently wrote:

The "Easter Mysteries" of Christianity begin with the anointing of the Sacred Bridegroom, suffer through the sacrificial death of the Bridegroom/King and culminate with his resurrection and the reunion of the Beloveds in the garden. This "never-ending story" celebrates the eternal--cyclical-- return of the Life Force at the vernal equinox. The sad fact is that, while celebrating the "new birth" inherent in the Resurrection of the Christ, Christianity failed to notice the role of the Bride--the "Sacred Complement" of the sacrificed King. The image of the Divine as "Partners" was lost when the Bride was silenced and defamed.

Clearly, the "sacrifical death" was not factual. It was mythical, representing the importance of our Selves in The All and the eternal cycle of life. This cycle of eternal life is not complete without the sacred feminine anymore than it would be without the sacred masculine. Mile's In The Garden interpretation of "the sto­ry of the great­est morn in his­to­ry" reflects this joyous reality, as expressed in the rites of spring when life begins anew and in great abundance.

God is no longer Male

The following article was found in the Daily Mail. 

The Scottish Episcopal Church has caused controversy by removing masculine references to God in a new order of service.  The new form of worship, which removes words such as 'Lord, he, his, him' and 'mankind' from services, has been written by the church in an attempt to acknowledge that God is 'beyond human gender'.  Episcopalian bishops have approved the introduction of more 'inclusive' language, which deliberately removes references suggesting that God is of male gender

Traditionalists have criticised the changes on the grounds that they smack of political correctness and because they believe they are not consistent with the teachings of the Bible.  The alterations have been made to provide an alternative to the established 1982 Liturgy, which, like the Bible, refers to God as a man.  The new order of service, which can be used by priests if they have difficulties with a male God, has been produced by the church's Liturgy Committee in consultation with the Faith & Order Board of General Synod and the College of Bishops.

The controversial changes were discussed at the church's General Synod recently. The minutes of the synod reveal that female priests had asked why God was still referred to as a man.  The altered version of the 1982 Liturgy sees masculine pronouns removed when they refer to God and the new approach has even been extended to humans.  For example, the word 'mankind' has been taken out and replaced with 'world'.  Some senior religious figures have objected to the new form of words.

More...Archbishop of Canterbury hits back after Stephen Hawking insists God did NOT create the universe.  'It is political correctness,' said Rev Stuart Hall of the Scottish Prayer Book Society and Honorary Professor of Divinity at the University of St Andrews.  'It is quite unnecessary. The word man in English - especially among scientists - is inclusive of both sexes.   'Those who try to minimise references to God as the Father and Christ as his Son have great difficulties, because the New Testament is shot through with these references.'  Direct quotations from the Bible have been spared change, because of a reluctance to interfere with the word of God.
Services in Scottish Episcopal churches, like the one above, could change as masculine references to God such as 'Lord, him and mankind' have been removed to provide an alternative to the established 1982 Liturgy.  However, the blessing at the end of services has been changed by some ministers from 'Father, Son and Holy Spirit' to 'Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier'.

'The changing of God language is a little tricky,' admitted Rev Darren McFarland, convener of the church's liturgy committee.  'It is then that opinion is much more divided. We have really tried not to mess around with the descriptions of God in the biblical text. But what we want to see is generous language when it comes to gender. God is above and beyond human gender.

'We are not saying God is not masculine. God is also feminine. The problem is trying to use human language to describe the indescribable. 'The bishops have permitted these changes, people do not have to use this form. But we are trying to honour the breadth of descriptions of God in a way that's helpful to the church and its membership.'

Last week scientist Stephen Hawking sparked a religious debate when he declared the universe was not created by god because 'the universe can and will create itself from nothing'.  Hawking's controversial claims from his new book The Grand Design, set out to contest Sir Isaac Newton's belief that the universe must have been designed by God as it could not have been created out of chaos.  The Archbishop of Canterbury dismissed Hawking's findings.
Read more:

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

In 1970 feminism was dead

In 1970 I was a junior/senior in high school. The Vietnam war was going strong in spite of waning public support. My generation of young men who couldn't afford to avoid the draft through the expense of college were exposed to Agent Orange, unbelievable genocide, bombing  raids and hand to hand combat in a world away that left a permanent scar on them and my generation.  Many women of my generation are lonely and alone because those men who could have been their companions in old age did not physically or psychologically survive to middle age because of the trauma inflicted upon them in Vietnam. The nation did not learn the lesson of Vietnam and we now send our sons and grandson's on another pentagon war.  In 1970 women's liberation was just beginning to find a voice, but babies were automatically given their father's name.  If no father was listed the word "illegitimate" was likely typed on the birth certificate.  There were no child care centers in 1970.   In elementary school the girls couldn't play Little League and almost all the teachers were female.  In a few states it was still against the law for men to teach grades below 6th grade. In junior high and high school the girls took Home Ec and the boys took Shop and the prinicpalof the school was  a man.  Girls had P.E. and played half court basketball and volleyball, but no swimming, soccer, cross country or track.  The prestigious physical activity for girls was cheerleading.  Most girls didn't take calculus or physics but they planned the dances and decorated the gym.  If a girl "got herself"  pregnant  (this activity usually requires a male, unless you are the virgin mary) she lost her membership in the National Honor Society and is expelled from school.  Abortion is only legal in New York or available underground in Chicago and was very costly and basically unavailable. Underground abortion was very expensive and very unsafe. Sex education was non-existent and so-called experts were debating whether there was such a thing as the female orgasm.  Birth control consisted of  high dose birth control  pills that were dangerous and had a lot of side effects.  Contraceptives were largely unavailable to teenagers.  Other forms of birth control consisted of  devices our mother's did not talk about such as diaphragm's which were nearly century old and awkward.  Homosexuals were in the closet and not accepted as citizens.  The Miss America pageant was the largest scholarship program for women.  Women could not be students at Harvard, Boston College, Citadel, West Point, Columbia, Dartmouth or any other all male schools.  The women's colleges were called "girls schools".  Women tended to major in home economics, teaching, or english.  A student was lucky to have learned that women were given the vote in 1920 but were not taught about black or white feminists of history.  There were practically no tenured female professors at any school, and the college campuses were not racially diverse.  In 1970 14% of doctorates were awarded to women. 3.5% of MBA's were female.  There were no female priests, rabbi's or preachers.  Women made fifty two cents to the dollar earned by males.  The want ads were segregated "Help wanted Male" and "Help wanted Female".  In 1970 twenty states had female gynecologists or fewer.  Women workers could be fired for being pregnant, especially if they are teachers, since the kids they teach aren't supposed to think that women have sex. There was no such thing as sexual harrassment in the workplace and no place to take grievances.  Women could not be airline pilots.  Sex appeal was a job requirement, as was make-up.  In 1970 less than 2% of the dentists were women, but 100% of the dental assistants were women.  When a women got married she promised to honor, love and obey her husband and couldn't get credit without her husband's signature.  The divorce rate in 1970 is the same as it is today.  The woman's movement did not cause a higher rate of divorce.  In 1970 "domestic violence" is not a term, and not a crime.  In 1970 women were legally encouraged to stay in abusive marriages.  In 1970, the majority of babies were born with the women strapped down and natural childbirth advocates were just beginning to speak out on behalf of women and the unborn.  Radical, and I do mean radical, mastectomies were the norm.  In 1970 women were dealing with raising kids, managing a household, and being undervalued and underprotected by society.  The 1970's was the decade of woman's liberation that brought about the changes that women take for granted today, but the Equal Rights Ammendment was never ratified and remains unratified today.  My state of Arkansas has never ratified the Equal Rights Ammendment.  The "Moral Majority" lead by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and other powerful evangelicals was formed out of the fear that the feminist movement of the 1970's would destroy america.  They were successful in stopping the ratification of the Equal Rights Ammendment and the furtherance of the movement, but there was a little burst of equality and logic and reason that prevailed for a decade before it was shouted down as dangerous and suspect.  Is feminism dead?  Will women lose reproductive rights?  Will students ever be allowed to be taught sex education  in the public schools?  Will abortion become an underground and dangerous procedure for only the wealthy?  Will our  society ever let girls grow up without imposing sexism upon them?  Will homosexuals be given the same rights that heterosexual citizens enjoy and take for granted?  I don't know, but I don't want to go back to 1970.

Monday, September 6, 2010

The fall of woman

Genesis describes a "paradise" that was created by god. First for Adam (the man he created from dirt) and then for his "helpmeet" Eve (who was created from one of Adam's ribs). They did not wear clothing and they had everything that they needed and walked with god daily. God put a tree of fruit in the middle of the garden that was "forbidden" for Adam and Eve to eat for the fruit possessed a power that would allow them to know "good and evil". One day, Satan, in the form of a serpent tempted Eve to eat the fruit "so she would be like god" and then she gave the fruit to Adam to eat. Once they ate the fruit they realized that they were naked and they hid from god in shame. God found them and killed an animal and made clothes for them and kicked them out of the garden after he cursed them by making them work for their food. He cursed Eve by making childbirth painful. The other part of the curse was for Eve to "desire" Adam, but for Adam to rule over Eve. The fall of Adam and Eve made Eve a "lesser" human to be dominated and subjugated. The "fall of man" gave Adam dominance over Eve even though she would "desire" to be equal and for the relationship to once again be one of love and companionship.

The fall of mankind sets up a culture of "patriarchy" where man is dominate as the family and tribal authority. Any woman who has ever gardened knows that she is subjected to toil and sweat to make food come out of the ground, and Adam's "curse" is her curse. The lost paradise is forever Eve's fault and she is thereafter judged to be a weaker and less trustworthy creature. Sex is changed to one of "desire" that is not met as she is seen as one who exists to bring forth children in pain. Love and tenderness and equality is now out of the equation as angry domination on the part of Adam takes over. This story unfairly blames Eve, and thereafter all women for the pain in childbirth and the inequality in male/female relationships. The fall of mankind sets up a pattern of patriarchy that has been followed for 4,000 years. The western cultures have evolved into more or less secular humanistic cultures where reason and logic can sometimes ascend above ancient tribal folklore myths, but the muslims are still deeply entrenched in the myth with cultures that are a mirror the effects of the curse. For christians to know what life was like 4.000 years ago for women and children, they need to look no further than taliban ruled villages in Afghanistan.

I discuss the "fall of womankind" in order to point out that without the myth we do not need a "savior". If Eve's failure to obey a command by her creator never happened, we have nothing to be saved "from".
It is all just "make believe" told by ancient sheepherders to give them authority in their affairs and help them understand their plight and shape their tribes as they see fit. Once the mind rejects the story, one rejects the need for a god as a "savior", for one no longer needs to be saved.
Once the myth of the fall of womankind is rejected, men and women are free to create a society where women are equal and have a voice in the affairs of the culture. Christians everywhere would wish that the muslims would throw off the myth of male dominance that causes so much female suffering as a result of their belief in the fall of mankind. Christians are blinded by "faith" in the bible and unable to see the same mirror image in their own beliefs and their own culture. It is only fair that if we expect the muslims to discard the myth of the fall of mankinnd that christians would too. Celebrate logic and reason today and envision a future where we do not teach our children 4,000 year old stories of how the world began and how mankind came about when science tells us differently. Encourage a culture of justice based on reason and logic and celebrate equality today! It does not make sense to teach a creation story written by men who had no knowledge of the earth, the solar system or the universe, but created a myth that served their purposes and filled their "knowledge" void.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Mary Gallagher video on same sex marriage

This histronics over gay marriage is so hypocritical.  The modern church does not adhere to many teachings. (Women covering their heads for example) The cause of same sex marriage has reached a fever pitch that elects politicians.  Just like abortion has been used for years by politicians who want to appear righteous, same sex marriage arouses the same conservative pathos.  The church has imposed rigid beliefs on society about sex and birth control for 2,000 years.  Humans are trying to use reason and logic to order the affairs of society, but the religious will not let go of dogma.  President Bush was elected by such dogma, and the next president will be too because it works.  People who are religious want to tell others how to live their lives, even if they themselves cannot abide by the rules themselves.
I look forward to the day when society is ruled by logic and reason and humanistic ethics and not by religious dogma of religious books written by dubious writers claiming divine inspiration 2,000 years ago.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Woman "caught" in adultery!

"Now in our law, Moses commanded us to stone such.{Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22} What then do you say about her?""

Author: John 8 Verses #: 5

The old testament required that both man and woman committing adultery be stoned to death.  Here in this scene in the New Testament only the woman is brought before the jewish prophet Jeshua alone.  Jesus could have said any number of things to discredit the barbarism of killing people with stones who have been accused of adultery, but he insists that only the blameless men get to cast the first stone at her.  He did not use the moment to recant the teaching of "stoning" for adultery, neither does he insist that the man be brought before him as well.  The woman is bearing the scorn and public guilt as if she is the only one involved in the act of adultery.  The muslims still insist on the practice in their ancient holy book. The women bear the brunt of the stonings.  A few radical fundamentalists believe divorce should be illegal I doubt few would recommend the death penalty for sex outside of marriage.  This gives me hope that reason will eventually prevail if the christians and muslims don't destroy the planet first.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Jesus calls a woman a dog!

A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession." Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us." He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said. He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

Christian women love to tell the world how Jesus loves women and without Jesus the world would be brutal for women.  This story in Matthew 15:22-27 Jesus calls a woman from Canan a "dog" because of her nationality.  That does not sound very loving and inclusive for a "creator" to say about his creation.  He does not acknowledge her humanity or correct her for assuming a child is "demon possessed", but ridicules her to the other disciples.  She has to agree she is a dog and humors him to heal her daughter.  Since healthcare had not evolved many mysterious illnesses were considered to be "demon possession".  Why did Jesus not use his time on earth to expand the knowledge of mankind about biology and science and germs and disease?  He played to the base and "cast out demons" wherever he went.  The church today tries the same replication of miracles on any given Sunday throughout christendom.  To be told you need to have satan "cast out" of you is a pretty alarming and very intimidating and humiliating experience.  There is never proof of "demon possession" or the exorcism,  just a lot of hoopla and going through the motions.  In Africa parents are abandoning their children and claiming those children are demon possessed.  The amount of cruelty and harm done to those children in the name of superstition, mysticism and fanaticism is horrendous.  Children as little as 3 years of age are being abandoned on the street by smug, uncaring superstitious "christian" parents.  Their religion justifies their cruelty to their own children.  The bible offers them plenty examples of callousness and false piety.

Women must be veiled?

"But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonors her head. For it is one and the same thing as if she were shaved."

Author: 1 Corinthians 11 Verses #: 5

It is wrong for a man to pray with his head covered and wrong for a woman to pray without her head covered.  Contemporary christian women ignore this verse entirely.  Up until the 1960's women at least wore hats and veils in church.  Modern protestant churches have completely given this edict up.  It is just not popular.  A head scarf is an inconvenience and a visual reminder that women and men are not equal scripturally.  This is just not a popular concept and the practice of women covering their heads has been given up except for nuns in the catholic tradition.  There is nothing more inconvenient that having to keep something on top of your head.  The head covering is still completely required for an islamic woman to show piety.  Nothing reveals inequality more.  Men are free to be themselves and women must be covered.  Modern christian women have chosen freedom in this aspect and have rejected the symbolism that they are "different" and must appear different than men.  The whole of Paul's teaching served to keep women silent, powerless and "covered" for 2,000 years of dogma.  Modern women reject this.  Should we also reject that God is male and male is god.  Should we also reject that Eve was "created" from Adam?  Biology and evidence would tell us that Eve birthed the first human(s) and is the mother of all humans.  The worship of a "male god" who devalues women and their biology has negated their right to exist for 4,000 years.  At one point the first Eve birthed the first "human", and she was not wearing a veil when she did it!

Monday, August 23, 2010

Long hair = spirituality

"But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering."

Author: 1 Corinthians 11 Verses #: 15

For 2,000 years christian women abstained from cutting their hair.  I find it iteresting that short hair became fashionable with the victory of the women's movement in achieving the right to vote for women.  Women became free in the 1920's and beyond with shorter hair and shorter skirts.  There are "cults" and christian groups who still teach that a woman should have long hair and long skirts.  They adhere to  literalism of scripture and they teach women to continue a lifestyle of domination through "authoritarian" marriages and church groups.  These women have never experienced the women's movement and are living a lifestyle that was challenged by women starting the the 1800's.  I can only imagine the engergy it must take to constantly teach that women cannot wear shorts, swimsuits and get their hair cut this day and age.  Legalistic, perfectionistic, performance based belief systems are exhausting and eventually just don't work.  It is religious lobotomy to be forced to live to the teaching of a very old book written by ancient men.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Child abuse encouraged by the bible

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.--Pr:22:15

This verse has been the sole justification for centuries and centuries of  childhood abuse.  The human race has been whipping, beating and spanking and hitting their offspring for centuries based on this one verse.  Humans and especially, children are very fragile and capable of being injured both emotionally and physically.  Children have their own unique view of the world but that does not mean that they are beyond reason and must be beaten into submission.  Child abuse, just like spiritual abuse is rampant in the church because cruelly, it is justified in the bible.  The abuser does not benefit the heart of the child, but breaks it.  I find it surprising that  many children who experience being spanked/beaten as children grow up to continue a relationship with the parent abuser and with the parent's god. Children who experience being beaten with a "rod" of correction often grow up hypervigilant and become abusers themselves.  The "good" book encourages parents to spank their children when they see fit and for perceived "foolishness".  Children need love and discipline and attention, rest and nutrition and adequate periods of exercise.  They do not need to be spanked and beaten with a rod.  In my opinion, this verse is proof that an all-knowing and all-wise god wrote the bible.  It was written by violent  men who had a very limited knowledge of psychology and sociology and biology.  Talk to your children, listen to your children...don't beat them when you are having a bad day and want to extend your personality as their "authority".  Parents do not have a right to use a "rod" on their children...that is spiritual, physical and psychological abuse.  One sure way of making sure children are angry, hurt and inwardly filled with rage is to "hit" them.  I blame this bible verse on the violence that fills our "christian" nation and fills our prisons and guides the pentagon mind set.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Pat Robertson anti-woman quote

"(T)he feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." –Pat Robertson

A compilation of the stupid things Pat Robertson has said since he began bloviating on TV since 1961 would be encyclopedic.  It is hard to imagine how he has dominated the airways for 50 years and amassed a personal wealth of over a billion dollars from closing his eyes and claiming to "talk" to and "hear" directly from God.  He practically, singlehandedly ushered in the neo pentecostal movement where believers on any given day also claim to know divine thoughts and intent.  On any given Sunday an unsuspecting visitor to any number of non-denominational/pentecostal churches will witness speaking in "tongues", "claims of healing", the casting out of demons and claims of divine intent on their life.  Who can argue against an "experience" whether there is any evidence of any of it is in fact reality.  The neopentecostal "show" has changed church going forever.  Ordinary people walk around with their bibles  and expound to one another from unprovable statements that begin with "thus saith the Lord", or "God told me to tell you"...such and such.   Everyone gets by with it....especially Pat Robertson.  People listen and give lots of money to people who claim to speak to God, hear from God and tell others all their revelations whether they are provable or not.  Women seeking equality and social justice could count on Pat Robertson to speak against such a noble cause.  "Godly men" through the ages have failed to see the value in women having equality with men.   They and their organizations are "anti-woman" and have lead a confused following of doting women.  It is the "faithful flock" of women followers  who give financial support to  pastors, teachers, televangelists and politicians that ultimately keep women's equality unequal. It is women who listen to leaders who teach them to go against their own best self interest and the self interest of women around them.  I suppose we will know when equality has arrived when men such as Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson no longer dominate the airways with vitreol and disdain for women and their movement and women no longer serve as the main donors of their "hate speech" airways.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Bith control as equal to murder for 16 Centuries

Listen to this early Christian church father St. Augustine (354-430): "Any woman who acts in such a way that she cannot give birth to as many children as she is capable of, makes herself guilty of that many murders ..."

Early church fathers made birth control on an equal footing with murder.  The current Quiverfull christian movement makes the same argument 16 centuries later.  The catholic church still forbids as a mortal sin the use of birth control and sterilization and forces that dogmatic stance on any man or woman who receives care or is employed by any one of their 648 Catholic hospitals in america.  Hospitals are a very profitable enterprise and the local diocese and the vatican is made wealthy by these hospitals and clinics and yet they do not respect free choice in the very private realm of family planning.  When I think of the multitudes of women who died over the centuries for complying to a church edict at their own peril when  pregnancy and delivery were in fact a deadly proposition for both the mother and the baby makes me weep.  Multiple pregnancies are dangerous for any female and sterilization becomes a safe and life extending option for almost any woman after age 40.  Haitian women die at or about age 45 after having 5 to 6 babies and leave behind orphans.  The Haitian healthcare system has been dominated and run by the catholic church for hundreds of years.  How can they call themselves Pro-Life when the outcome of no birth control and no sterilization procedures are so deadly?  This is just the subjugation of women by  male dominated religions  that are blinded by the dogma of aged popes and church fathers.

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Sperm is sacred and birth control forbidden

"Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them. They won't be disappointed when they speak with their enemies in the gate."

Author: Psalms 127 Verses #: 5

There is a movement among fundamentalist believers called the "Quiverful" movement.  They escew birth control as sinful and try to have as many children as they can.  They think their sperm is "sacred" and should not be wasted into a condom.  Sex is for procreation.  The women are raised to believe that their roll in life is to be a wife (helpmeet) to a man, birth as many kids as possible and homeschool those children.  They are serious about having babies for Jesus.  One or two children are never enough.  The women are taught through their pastors and prophets and priests that their value comes from being a "baby factory".  The men and male leaders do not consider the strain on the wives and children in this arrangement.  The above bible verse is the sole verse in the bible that these christians base their lifestyle on.  Currently, the Duggar family from Northwest Arkansas are seeking their 20th child, even though the last pregnancy delivery was nearly deadly for both mother and baby.  I discovered a blogger who has a website called where the author is trying to warn women of the spiritual abuse and false teaching of this movement.  The author had 7 children before she realized how dangerous multiple pregnancies were to her.  She also has come to realize how cruel the movement is to the children who are raised to be "kidbots" under a system where they are not allowed friends outside the family or the "movement".  The children are not given the freedom to pursue childhood, but are forced to work and conform to the rigidity within a large family.  The children and the women are to be silent and submissive under the male head of the household.  Why any woman participates in this philosophy is beyond comprehension, but the movement is growing, and by the time the woman "wakes up" is too late for her and her children.

No welfare to be given to young female widows according to the Bible

"But refuse younger widows, for when they have grown wanton against Christ, they desire to marry;"
Author: 1 Timothy 5 Verses #: 11

Paul had instructed Timothy to instruct the church to care for "widows" who were "widows indeed" if they did not have family to care for them, but to deny support to the younger widows because they were more likely to desire to have a spouse. Biblical marriages were arranged marriages until the last 200 to 300 years. The family chose your spouse and arranged who you were to be married to. Paul is assuming and chastising and denying care to younger widows because they were likely to desire to marry. This is cruel treatment and this is a cruel view against young widows, who no doubt have children that they were struggling to feed and clothe and house. It is natural to desire to pass through life with someone who will share and care for you and your children. Paul, again, shows a lack of tenderness and compassion to young widows who may need help and may desire companionship. Paul views a desire to marry as something sinful. He instructs Timothy and other single believers to remain single as he was. A desire to marry was a desire to give into "fleshly desires". Women desired children in hopes that when they grew older the children would take care of them. The teachings of Paul that instructed single believers to remain single was not a jewish teaching and tradition, but eventually became a way to be "godly". It became a prerequistite to priesthood. Through Paul's teachings godliness was attributed to a single and celibate lifestyle. This was a unique New Testament concept fostered by the teachings of Paul, who never met Jesus, nor heard Jesus speak. The very earliest 1st century jewish believers rejected Paul's teachings and status as an apostle. It was nearly a hundred years after Paul's writing that certain groups vied for Paul's doctrines and teachings to be taught. In the 2nd and 3rd century the followers of Paul began to dominate christianity by calling themselves "Pauline" christians. The earliest christians did not have Paul's teachings and did not follow Paul's teachings and no doubt viewed all widows in a more compassionate light.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

OK to sell your daughter

""If a man sells his daughter to be a female servant, she shall not go out as the male servants do."

Author: Exodus 21 Verses #: 7

The bible condones slavery in both the Old Testament and the New Testament.  This chapter in Exodus puts forth "tribal" law as it pertains to the buying and selling of slaves both within the family, the tribe and neighboring tribal clans.  Polygamy, slavery and genocide are repeat themes in the bible. 

When american multi-national corporations move to Mexico so they can "buy" cheap labor at .40 cents per hour they prefer to "buy" young females.  These females are replaced when they marry, become pregnant or become ill with a newer and younger female.  The world still allows "slave labor", we just call it NAFTA, CAFTA or multi-national globalization.  When these very same corporations discover they can "buy" labor at .10 cents per hour in China they leave Mexico and set up shop in China where again, they overwhelmingly prefer young female labor.  The happy meal toys made in China are our way of saying we condone "slave labor" at the cheapest price.  The only question is "Do you want a boy happy meal or a girl happy meal"?

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Silent Women

"But I don't permit a woman to teach, nor to exercise authority over a man, but to be in quietness."
Author: 1 Timothy 2 Verses #: 12

It took 2,000 years before women were allowed to go to college.  I am sure that this verse is responsible for the fact that it took christian society 2,000 years to advance the cause of equality for women and move on past this verse.  Eventually even a judeo/christian society came to see the value of educated women.  Because america wanted/ needed children who could read the bible and america had to allow women access to the teaching profession out of convenience.  Because americans wanted their children to be able to read the bible  we allowed women who were not married and did not have children to become school teachers.  Each generation made some progress toward liberation  In 1920 women were given the freedom to vote.  That struggle lasted through 70 years of protests on the part of women.  Most professions other than teaching and nursing are still dominated by men.  It has only been in the last two decades that a few women have broken the glass ceiling and become doctors, professors, and lawyers and politicians and CEO's, but women and minorities are still a minority in almost all professions.

Christian sects that adhere to "literalism" still keep women strictly in the home and cleaning the church.  The men are the prophets and preachers and priests.  Out of convenience, the women run the day care programs and the bible schools, but are not the elders, deacons and ministers. 

The apostle Paul, who is attributed to be the author of this bible verse never met Jesus and wrote in a time up to 30 years after the death of Jesus.  The validity of Paul's teaching is a debate I will not even enter into, but many of his teachings are clearly designed to keep "women in their place" and in total submission to men and the church. Timothy, the young wanna be minister is living with his mother and grandmother who shared their faith with him. Timothy at the time of this writing was a very young man.  Paul is instucting him on how to start a church.  A desire to return to "literalism" is a desire to roll the clock back on equality to the last century and the century before that, and none of us would want that for ourselves, our "sisters" or our daughters.  The catholic church and many protestant churches is still a place of silence for women.  Women are discriminated against for being women  and are made to feel like it is their purpose to be submissive and have babies for Jesus.  Michelle Duggar truly believes her eggs and her husband's sperm are sacred and must be allowed to procreate no matter what the cost to her, her family and her babies.  Biblical "literalism" is exposed for the lack of logic and insanity that it is.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Menstruation and levitical law

""'If a woman has a discharge, and her discharge in her flesh is blood, she shall be in her impurity seven days: and whoever touches her shall be unclean until the evening."

Author: Leviticus 15 Verses #: 19

A normal and natural part of being a women is shedding the lining of the uterus once per month in a discharge of blood.  A creator would know this and acknowledge this as fact, and would declare that there is nothing unnatural about the occurence.  The holy bible, on the other hand makes menstruation something that makes a woman an untouchable.  I would assume that this included little children and breast feeding infants that absolutely require the "touch" of their mother whether she in having her monthly period or not.  To refer to a biologic norm as an "impurity" which renders a woman an untouchable and impure speaks to an author and a biblical authority that does not understand biology and implies that Yahweh  was completely out of touch with "his" own creation.  Clearly,  the bible was written by male priests 4,000 years ago who had no knowledge of science and biology and apparently little actual direct revelation from an all knowing "creator" who saw women as lesser beings who were impure and untouchable once per month.

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Women twice as unclean after having a female child

"But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her period; and she shall continue in the blood of purification sixty-six days."

Author: Leviticus 12 Verses #: 5

In Leviticus 12:2  the bible states that when a woman bears a son she is unclean one week.  In the above verse if she bears a female she is unclean two weeks and then she is declared unclean twice as long as if she had had a son.  As modern man knows the length of time that a woman bleeds after having a baby has nothing to do with the sex of the child she delivered.  The length of time a woman bleeds just depends on how quickly her body recovers from the delivery.  Ancient biblical men saw women as less desirable and unclean.  The bible strictly forbid women to be touched during their menstrual cycle or after childbirth and demanded that the woman present a lamb as an offering at the temple after  her purification of 33 days for a boy child and 66 days if she had a female child.  Women were isolated as untouchables after childbirth rather than embraced and helped and comforted.  Only  evil men would make such cruel rules for  women to live under.  Childbirth in the desert is hard enough, but when you are declared unclean and untouchable after delivery life was made very harsh for mother and child.  Modern society sees a picture of the care of women and girls in the traditions of muslim societies today and the world is aghast.  We forget that this same treatment of women was our heritage as well.  It is only with centuries of struggle were christian women able to advance as well, and only after ancient and absurd and horrifying laws were discarded.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Ordering the death of your daughter-in-law

Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." Genesis 38:13-18
Judah has sex with his daughter-in-law and then orders her to be burned to death. (verse 24)

This whole chapter is full of God killing people, but in this part of the story, Tamar, his daughter- in -law tricks Judah into sleeping with her so she can have children since she is his son's widow.  Tamar  followed Judah to where he was shearing sheep.  She covered herself  with a veil so Judah could not recognize her.  Judah sees her and thinks that she is a prostitute because her face was covered.  He proposes to pay her to have sex with him and asks how much it would cost to buy sex.  She wanted his ring and his staff and bracelets as a pledge and she agrees to have sex for a baby lamb.  Judah agrees to the price and sleeps with her.  Tamar gets pregnant from this whole episode.  She puts back on her garments of widowhood and goes back home and about her business.  When Judah goes back to find her to pay her and give her a sheep from his flock he could not find  "the harlot".  He wants his property back that he left in pledge. He began to ask, "Where is the harlot?"  The sheep shearers replied that there was no harlot. According to the story,  three months passes and Judah finds out that Tamar tricked him into sleeping with her and finds out she was pregnant.   In verse 24 upon hearing what Tamar had done Judah orders her to be brought forth in order to be burned to death.  He eventually relents and let's her have her babies and leaves her alone, but it got pretty tense for Tamar, his widowed daughter-in-law for he was going to kill her by burning her to death.

In this story several glaring truths come out.  It is OK for Judah to sleep with a prostitute, but it is not OK to take matters into your own hands in you are a widow.  For Tamar,  it  meant death.  Secondly,  Judah, as the head of the patriarchal tribe of sheep herders has the right to pronounce judgement and have Tamar killed in a violent death for tricking him.  In the old testment the stories are told from the man's perspective and the tribal leader makes up his laws as he goes along.  Women are worth less than the animals and have no more rights than a slave.  The rights of women are irrelevant and not considered.  They are invisible.  Patriarchal societies, religions and church organizations always make women invisible and without value.

Eventually, in the story, when Tamar showed that Judah was the one who impregnated her by bringing him his ring, staff and bracelets, Judah relents and lets her live and bear his children.  The  Bible stories always end with the women having male offspring to carry on the family line.  Female offspring were just as disregarded as their mother's.  The pressure was always on a woman to have male babies.  Tamar was lucky to have her life spared by the patriarch of the family who should have allowed her to remarry anyway.  Females in the bible are just vessels to propagate your tribe.  In male dominated societies women are excluded and disregarded.  Patriarchy brings women universal violence and despair.  All patriarchal religions sap female energy and all patriarchal religions hold to books authored by men and for men and hold to every view from a man's point of view.  Women have suffered under Judaism, Islam and Chrisitanity long enough.  Our creative vital force has been silenced for 4,000 years.  Man made religion breaks the heart of all wise women everywhere simply seeking a right to exist.

Monday, July 26, 2010

Allah causing osteoporosis in muslim women who wear burqas

Medical experts in the West warn that Islamic women wearing these all-encompassing burqas in the northerly climates, which have far less sunshine, suffer much more from osteoporosis due to a lack of Vitamin D.

The garments don't let through enough sunshine. And their newborn babies are prone to getting more seizures for the same reason.

"In Ireland, which is experiencing a large influx of muslim immigrants at the moment, women wearing the burqa, doctors are warning, 'are at increased risk of pelvic fractures during childbirth because of vitamin D deficiency due to a lack of sunlight. "And babies born to women with vitamin D deficiency are also more prone to seizures in their first week of life," according to Dr Miriam Casey, expert in Medicine for the Elderly at the Osteoporosis Unit in St James’s hospital in Dublin. The burqa - an all-enveloping outer garment, does not allow enough sunlight through to give women sufficient vitamin D, she warns.
The above paragraphs are from  an article published on the internet.  The reason I am interested in this dilema for the muslim women is this: on the one hand Allah has created them to need sunlight and has created a religion that requires them to be covered head to toe not allowing them to have enough sunlight and vitamin D for bone health.  Their is clearly a lack of logic and reason in  the religious practice of burqas.  The muslim women believe Allah created them. Allah, being all wise, created them and their babies with a need to be exposed to sunlight to prevent vitamin D defiiciencies, and prevent pelvic fracures and seizures in the infants.  But, Allah, is also telling them to be covered at all times when outdoors with a burqa which prevents them from getting enough sunlight.  Does Allah have it in for these poor women.  He created them to need sunshine and he created Islam which is requiring them to be covered in burqas so that they cannot possibly get sunshine.
Man made religions have it in for women.  Women don't stand a chance when men are in control of "The Book"and the "prophet" and the "rules".  At some point you pick logic and mental and physical health and say "goodbye" to religion and the man made deity that has it in for you!   All these muslim women have to do to protect themselves from osteoporosis and dangerous seizures in their newborns is throw off their burqas and the man made rule that keeps them from getting enough sunlight!  Not easy when you can be stoned and/or whipped for disobedience to the rules. 

God's justice for Rape

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." Deuteronomy 22:28-29

I suppose if she is a slave and there was no father the rape was OK...from the man's point of view and from God's point of view.  The woman's point of view is irrelevant in the Old Testament.
What woman would want to marry a man who raped her?  Why could the woman not be paid the fifty pieces of silver to her?
In the Old Testament only the man was allowed to divorce the woman.  The woman was not allowed to divorce the man. 

Saturday, July 24, 2010

Cheerleaders for Allah, Yahweh and Jesus

Without the blind devotion of women,  the 3 middle eastern desert religions would not exist in the strength and power that they exist in the modern world. It is the women of all 3 of these religions  who make excuses for why they have be treated like animals and shoved to the sidelines while their culture and religion marches on without them.  Without women aspiring to birth Yahweh's male messiah or the next prophet of Islam,  or providing male jihad soldiers for our "holy" wars we might actually be able to achieve a world obsessed with peace and not war, beauty and not destruction, and compassion instead of  hatred.  On any given day it is not the men I blame for the poverty of love and beauty in the world, but the masses of women who blindly follow the male dominated religions which have birthed our male dominated cultures that have silenced women's viewpoints.  As women see it,  only male popes and male messiahs and male prophets can absolve them of the sin of being a woman. The teachings of the male prophets and teachers make them a "lesser" human being  while playing mind games claiming love and devotion.   I think it is about time women at least recognized a "male" agenda in their religion.  We have been blind to it  for centuries, and those who were not blind were burned as heretics or "witches".  It has only been with a struggle over 160 years that american women  have arrived at a place of some equality culturally.  Modern day beauty queens and young blonde barbie doll newscasters forget that they are only able to hope for some apparent and visual equal status on TV because of very plain clothed, but outspoken women that began to take up the cause of women in 1850.  A study of the women's movement in american history class is an hour long lecture at best.  The feminist movement is a  historical 160 year "sidenote" linked with the women of the temperance movement like Carrie Nation and women who were ant-feminists  like Beverly LaHaye and Phyllis Shafly who were used by the male dominated "moral majority".  Young american girls get to be very confused about reproductive rights, birth control, virginity and politics thanks to women like Sarah Palin who aspires to be a cheerleader for the pentagon and corporations and big oil, leaving compassionate healthcare as a right for the wealthy and teen pregnancy as an act of a rite of passage for the uneducated and poor single mother's left to wonder how to raise the children they were forced to birth.   Until the women of the world can plan their families, pick a soulmate and believe that they do not need a male pope or male prophet to absolve them of their "sins" we have our work cut out for us.  Encourage another woman today and begin the discipline of looking at  religion as the self serving man-made organization that it is and provide yourself some emotional distance from the abuse.

"She" shall bear a "Son"

"He said, "I will certainly return to you when the season comes round. Behold, Sarah your wife will have a son." Sarah heard in the tent door, which was behind him."

Author: Genesis 18 Verses #: 10

Throughout the Old Testament the stories are replete with women being burdened with producing a "son".  The  importance of birthing a boy was part of the pressure on every jewish maiden so that the messiah could be born, the messiah had to be a manchild.  Women have not only been burdened with the task of birthing and raising children but in that responsibility was the pressure to have a son to carry on the family lineage and name.  In patriarchal cultures such as judaism, islam and christianity a manchild has more worth and importance than a female child.  Of course this is ridiculous and thanks to modern society moving past the mindset of these ancient stories have females been able to be viewed as equal. It has only been in the last generation that a female child has not seen as a lesser human being.  Women can thank science for this as science has proven that it is the male sperm that decides the sex of a fetus and the determination of sex has nothing to do with the female egg.  Women were blamed for 6 millineum for a failure to produce a male offspring until science shed some light on the subject. 
The other point I want to make is that ALL the stories center around men.  On occasion a woman like Eve, or Ruth or Esther get a bit part, but the larger story is about what the men are or are not doing.  The bible is a history book that is completely patriarchal.  Women only have value when they produced a male heir.  The story of Ruth and Mary are prime examples.  Baby boys are what makes the Old Testament continue along it's story line and story path.  Once seeing this, a modern women wonders where she fits it to the religion as a whole. The answer is...on the peripherary...and as a servant making babies for Jesus, Yahweh or Allah.  Women no doubt accompanied Jesus and washed clothes and cooked, but  even the New Testament  is a story of men as seen from a man's point of view.  When women wake up we will have a female pope or no pope at all...a female minister on staff or no women cooking church suppers...and a female islamic leader or no female followers of Allah at all.  The only question remains...when will women wake up and reject the patriarchy?

Friday, July 23, 2010

Billions inherit the "Eve" Curse

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception: in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

In Genesis 3 is the story of the serpent talking Eve into questioning the commandment to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  God promised that eating of the fruit of the tree would bring about death.  The serpent told Eve that it would not cause death, but instead she would be as gods, knowing good and evil.  Eve ate the fruit and gave to Adam and then they realized that they were naked.  As the story goes, God was walking about in the garden looking for Adam and Eve. Everyone starts blaming everyone.  Adam blames Eve and Eve blames the serpent.  God proceeds to curse the serpent and Eve and Adam and eventually kicks them all out of the garden.  The above bible verse is Eve's curse. 

The curse of pain and sorrow in childbirth and the curse of male dominance is transferred to "all" women for all time and sets in motion the last 6,000 years of male domination of women and girls. 
The curse is for women to be treated unequally and dominated.  The male dominance of women in the hebrew culture, the islamic culture and the christian culture has it's roots in this curse.  All of these religions have their roots in the deserts of the middle east.  The west has fully adopted the above story as "sacred truth" and "infallible" words of God and believe every word literally without question.  The catholic church holds fast to it's exclusion of women into the priesthood and uses stories and scripture like the above as validation of the belief women are not to be allowed equal designations of opportunity within the church.  Protestant religions have not been any kinder to women either.  Thankfully, through the feminist movement that began in 1850 and through the competent rule of european queens has this "curse" on women been eased.  Paul was very hard on disallowing women equality in his writings.  It is imperative that women continue to work for safe healthcare delivery systems where women can safely birth children and that women not lose sight of  the progress of the gains of feminists who have gone before us.  We must prove our value and intellect and competence and continue to pave the way of a "curse" free culture for our daughters and granddaughters.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Ordination of women priests a "grave crime" according to the vatican.

On Thursday, the Vatican issued new rules and made the “attempted ordination” of women one of the gravest crimes under church law, lumping it in the same category with — wait for it — the clerical sex abuse of minors. Women attempting to be priests and those who ordain them already risk automatic excommunication, but the decree goes further and labels the action “a crime against sacraments.”

My favorite feminist is Mary Daly.  Forced to study  theology in europe because no american catholic university would admit her to a doctoral program she exposed the male dominance of the church.  She helped women to see that the church did not represent them or care about them.  Women were useful only as long as they reproduced faithful offspring brought up to be loyal to the church.  Under such a system, birth control and sterilization are strictly forbidden as not having children would free women up to the pursuit of education, commerce and self expression.  Mary, the mother of Jesus is worshipped for her obedience to God to be willing to have a child for God.  Mary is also worshipped for her virginity.  This is a big guilt trip for a modern woman to uphold.  Mary is by and large a silent participant and no doubt God and the priesthood above all else admire obedient silence from the women that they wish to dominate and control.  The protestant movement also excludes women and prefers obedient silent women as well.  Do all these men really speak for God?  Does God see women as inferior and incapable of leading congregations and worshippers?  I think women have been "had" for thousands and thousands of years by male dominated societies and religions.  Christianity has not furthered the cause of women.  Christianity has hindered it.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

The curse of the bastard child

A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD." (Deuteronomy 23:1-2)
If someone has the misfortune of being born as a result of his mother being raped he is excluded by this edict from worship for 10 generations. This is punishing the child for something that happened between the 2 adults that parented him. It is most probably very likely his mother did not intend to have a child out of wedlock. This bible verse demonizes children out of wedlock. A bastard child does not have the same access to god as a child whose father claims him. I remember that the word bastard carried very heavy shame up to my generation. The shame of birthing and raising a "bastard" has no doubt been the cause of women for centuries risking their own life to resort to self-induced abortions to remove a pregnancy that would result in a stigmatized "bastard" child. Thankfully, the stigma has been lifted in our present culture to the point where now up to 45% of mothers birth babies out of wedlock. To take the bible literally those children would not be allowed to enter a church or a synagogue for 10 generations.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Jesus and Slavery

 As for slavery, it appears Jesus  encouraged the beating of slaves:
And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.-Luke 12:47

Note, the word "servant" here means slave. The Biblical Jesus lived in a time when slavery flourished, yet He never spoke or fought against it.

The British abolished slavery 30 years before america, and they did so without a civil war. During the 1800's the harsh reality and  the offensiveness of slavery came to be an affront to many americans.  This controversy split the country and the church.  Slavery has been practiced for thousands of years yet neither the old testament or new testament speaks out against the practice of owning another human being and making them a slave without freedom.  What are we to make of this attitude toward slavery by Jesus who claimed to speak for god, his father?  The roman slaves at least saw that they now had a chance to live in eternity as "equals" with their masters.  This no doubt gave them hope.  The early american slaves were not thought of as human or possessing a soul, as time went on and masters were able to communicate with their slaves they no doubt recognized their humanity, and with time some came to see that "owning" another human being was aggregious.  For various social and religious, political and economic  reasons slavery is now widely rejected, although still practiced in some parts of the world.  Slavery was horrible for men, but unbearable for women.  Female slaves were raped and beaten and overworked and denied any sense of a life of peace .  What do we make of Jesus not speaking out against slavery and the apostle Paul teaching slaves to be submissive, when he could just as easily have told early not own another human?  This is a question that led to 2,000 years slavery before it was rejected by compassionate human thinkers.  I can only ask the questions.  I don't have the answer.  The bible was written at the behest of powerful Kings.  Was it important to placate these Kings or the rich supporters of the church upon which the livelihood of the monks and priests depended?   Who was King James and did he and the bible scholars on which he supported have their own agendas?  I do not know.  All I know is that neither the Old Testament or the New Testament forbid the owning of slaves as a requirement for righteousness. 

Sunday, July 18, 2010

The one bible chapter "written" by a woman

Proverbs 31: 1-31  The words of King Lemuel that his mother taught him.  This chapter is an uplifting view of a capable woman.  The chapter teaches  that women are valuable, capable and resourceful and make a positive influence on their families and society.  The bible is said to have been written by 39 male authors, even this chapter is inserted into the book of Proverbs at the behest of King Lemuel.  King Lemuel obviously felt that when women are allowed a chance to be contributing members of society their families benefit as does the society as a whole.  He obviously wanted to honor, include and give deference to his mother's teachings.  King Lemuel's mother taught him that women were valuable and should be recognized for their contributions to their families and society.  This chapter has no doubt been a source of encouragement to women trying to assert their rightful place in their male dominated societies over the past 4,000 years.  The chapter encourages women to be industrious and hard working and assumes women are more than capable of buying and selling and creating a market for their talents.  The woman in the chapter has servants which free her up to do many resourceful things.  Modern day females can occasionally afford to hire help in child care and domestic chores and still come out ahead, but for the most part "mothering" has kept women completely preoccupied and unable to get all the education they need to compete in a male dominated world.  I think we need to expand on Proverbs 31 and tell young girls it is OK for you to delay child bearing until they are educated and have traveled and have taken the time to develop. Society and the church needs to start saying it is OK  to choose not to have children at all.  With the world approaching 9 billion choosing to be childless can be an act of conscious and self protection and mercy.   I am very concerned about the trend of modern girls and young women rushing into "marriage" and "child bearing".  It is almost as if we need a new feminist movement.  Young girls are looking for value and affirmation in having children before they can afford to raise a child and they are succumbing to marriages before they know themselves and before their partner has lived a single life too!   These early choices are destroying women's lives and committing them to a lifelong struggle to support children often by themselves in poverty.  Travel, education and living the life of a single person can teach a woman a great deal about herself and allow her to develop her own thoughts and preferences separate from a man.  This is a good thing and should be encouraged.  King Lemuel's mother was a wise woman who encouraged him to consider the value of a women.  What would she tell young women today? 

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Death commanded for brides!

We read the Golden Rule and judge it to be a brilliant distillation of many of our ethical impulses. And then we come across another of God’s teachings on morality: if a man discovers on his wedding night that his bride is not a virgin, he must stone her to death on her father’s doorstep (Deuteronomy 22:13-21).[3]

The Old Testament was not kind to women.  Proof of virginity is a not clear cut.  The woman may or may not have been born with  a complete hymen, and if she does possess it it can be torn easily at any point during childhood and a woman may or may not bleed with her first experience with penetration.  The groom had already paid a bride price and the father had already sold his daughter into an arranged marriage in the tribal custom of the ancient hebrews.  If a groom wanted to take displeasure in the bride and claim she was not a virgin the groom was "commanded" to stone her to death on her father's doorstep.  This continues the belief that the virginity and the proof of it was the only value a woman possessed.  Virginity is worshipped in the worship of the virgin Mary and seen in both the muslim and christian  and jewish cultures as the only quality that makes a woman desirable and valuable.  The root of this obsession with virginity no doubt springs from this Old Testament commandment and continues to this day.  Would the god creator write such a commandment? Or was this a teaching from a patriarchal society?  When we go into court we swear on the bible to tell the truth.  Does the bible tell the truth?
For 4,000 years religious men and women have sworn that every word is in fact the "word of God".
Would a just and loving god prescribe such unjust treatment for a young girl because she did not bleed upon penetration on her wedding night?

Is Sarah Palin a christian?

"Jesus looking at him loved him, and said to him, "One thing you lack. Go, sell whatever you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me, taking up the cross.""

Author: Mark 10 Verses #: 21

In this passage Jesus is asked how a person can acquire eternal life.  The man who was questioning Jesus was a rich man who claimed he had kept the commandments all his life.  Jesus told him that he lacked one thing in order to qualify to receive eternal life.  He was told that he was to sell everything  and give the money to the poor and follow Jesus.  The man became sad because he had great wealth.

How many wealthy female televangelists have given everything to the poor?  How many wealthy christian CEO's have given everything they have to the poor?  Have very public christians like Sarah Palin obeyed the command of selling everything they have in order to acquire eternal life?  Has your pastor?  Who was the last christian you met who sold everything and given the money to the poor?

The rich young ruler in the story asked very clearly how he could inherit eternal life and Jesus told him to sell everything he had and give to the poor.  The verses doesn't say a sell a few things or give 10% to the church or your local pastor, Jesus was very clear about this.  Sell everything you have and give to the poor.  Sarah Palin pays Washington insiders for help from her political action committee, and she certainly is not on record for giving any amount of money to the poor, let alone all of it.  Is Sarah Palin a christian or not?  Who do you know or who have you ever known who follows this teaching of Jesus.  We all like John 3:16 because it just requires "belief" and not a lifestyle of poverty to get into heaven but is that not a "cherry picking" of biblical commands and Jesus' teachings? 

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Abolishing Abortion

Sue Engle, who won the republican primary in Nevada is just the latest republican politician who would restrict abortions even in the case of incest and rape.  Her latest comment is that  pregnancy is "God's will" and therefore should not be disrupted.  Scientifically and biologically  a woman becomes pregnant when her egg is fertilized by a sperm, it is not a "spiritual" phenomenon, but a consequence of the forces of nature. Let me say it again, fertilization is a scientific, biologic phenomenon not a spiritual phenomenon.  We have no evidence that everything or anything that happens in our world is "God's will".  The ancient book of Job attritubed both his blessings and calamities to God.  Some modern day believers have adopted Job's theolgy and have come to spiritualize everything in their lives as well as acts of god.  Modern believers are looking to god for complete protection and intervention at every moment of every day.  This is certainly their right, but do they have a right to force that level spiritualization on society as a whole?  If god broke your arm should you attempt to mend it?  If god broke your hip should you intervene or accept it as god's will? If god gave you high blood pressure should you ignore it and "pray" god will take it away or should you see a doctor and take blood pressure medications.  If you are pregnant with a baby that has severe birth defects and you are 45 and cannot afford to raise a child with birth defects should you be forced by political laws to keep the pregnancy?  Difficult issues to be sure.  Does Sue Engle have the right to make that decision for the girls and women in the USA when she comes to power as a politician?  She thinks so and so do her supporters.  Sue Engle did not win the republican primary in a vacum.  Many republican men and women agree with her and are striving to get her elected just so political pressure can be applied to restricting women's rights.  In Brazil, where abortion is illegal thousands of women die from attempts to self induce abortions.  This will soon be the case in america where the pro-life politicians are crafting  state and federal laws that will make abortion obsolete without overturning Roe v. Wade.  Governor Bobby Jindal just signed a law making it illegal for an abortion provider to be sold insurance in the state of Louisiana.  Even the most passionate providers would not risk to liability of performing abortion without insurance coverage.  Every abortion provider is a target for potential assassination by rabid pro-life forces.  To put your very life at risk in order to practice medicine is something only a few brave doctors are willing to subject themselves to.  It is not easy  for women to find an abortion provider now, how many will perform abortions without malpractice insurance?  Let's be honest, Roe v Wade could be overturned.  The surpreme court has a conservative majority that were appointed by republican presidents who promised the public that they would abolish abortion.  Why has it not happened?  Because it is a dangling carrot.  Pro-life forces are the republican party's base and a very secure source of loyalists.  To get rid of Roe v Wade would be shooting themselves in the foot.  Local and state level pro-life politicians will continue to craft laws that will make abortion inaccessible thus eliminating abortion without having to overturn Roe v Wade and the conservative anti-choice female politicians  often times lead the charge to take away a woman's right to decide whether to keep a pregnancy invoking religion.  If the alarming trend of restrictive state laws continue we are not many years away from women having no choice.  Right now, wealthy girls and women can travel and  pay for an abortion.  It is the 6th grade girl in Dumas, Arkansas that does not have the funds or the ability to access a safe legal procedure that would allow her to continue her childhood.  Who is speaking up for the 13 and 14 year old girls?  Certainly not self righteous politicians like Sue Engle, Sara Palin, Michelle Bachman and Tom Coburn and Bobby Jindal.  The pro-choice voices are being silenced by elected officials who ran on a pro-life platform who would punish women with unwanted pregnancies.  1 in 3 female soldiers are raped while serving in the military and yet abortion outlawed on military bases and the military will not pay for an abortion under any circumstance.  Not only are female soldiers intimidated into not reporting their rapes, but they cannot terminate the pregnancy if they get pregnant from the rape.  Dr. Tiller wore a button that said, "Trust Women" but he was silenced for doing so.  Descent into theocracy is never good for women.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Divorce or Die Headline

Today while reading the news I came across an article about a young couple in India who are being told by the tribal elders in their village that a mistake was made in allowing them to marriage as their "castes" do not match up.  The ultimatum, as it has come down from the tribal elders to divorce or be killed by the tribe.  The couple is in the process of trying to figure out how to flee their village.

This situation is interesting to westerners who no doubt feel a sense of superiority that our culture is not ruled by tribal elders, or a caste system or a dowry system.  The article stated that in India thousands of babies are aborted each year because they are girls.  In a male dominated society of male tribal elders male children are being selected and preferred. With a strong dowry system in place young people are not free to choose their lovers and life partners.  The village elders and their parents are the ones in control of their destiny.  Before westerners become so glib,  village "elders" approving who can and cannot marry and society wanting boys as more desirable is part of the history of Islam, Judaism and Christianity.  All of these religions are based on tribal lore with men participating as the central characters.  Men and women have struggled to break free of the ridiculous demands of their religions for thousands of years. I am quite frankly surprised these ancient religions based on the fables of illiterate sheep herders and fishermen still dominates modern day laws and culture and politics. Man made and male dominated religions and traditions are alive and well and thriving would think at least that women would refuse to participate.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Gang rape OK with "angels" and Lot

Genesis 19:8
"Behold now, I have two daughters which have no known man; let me I pray bring them out to you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof."

According to this ancient tale about a sheepherder who is living in a city called Sodom, god sends angels to convince Lot to leave the city and travel elsewhere.  Lot is living with his wife and two daughters.  The angels did not protest when Lot offered his daughters to become victims of gang rape.  Lot is revered as a prophet by muslims and jews, but the muslims exclude the part of the story where Lot's daughters get daddy drunk and have sex with him in order to preserve the lineage of the tribe.  In the Old Testament "Thou shalt not Kill" applied only within the tribe and did not apply outside the tribe. In the story we are supposed to believe that God rained fire and brimstone and killed all the inhabitants of the cities and on the plains as his judgement agains their sins.   As Lot's family was  fleeing the city the angels told them to not "look back" (vs 17) and escape to the mountains as God was going to destroy the city. But Lot's  wife looked back and God turned her into a pillar of salt.  Lot's  daughters were terrified and felt like their only hope was to great pregnant by their father in order to preserve the family line.  As the story goes they got their father drunk and he had sex with him.   They got pregnant and they both had son's. 

From a woman's perspective this story details how little Lot thought of his daughter's.  At  a point of conflict with the men of the city the only thing he thought of was to offer his daughter's up to the men of the city for gang rape. As this story has been handed down over thousands of years it points to what little value daughters and women had to these ancient men.  In the story,  Lot is important enough for God to send angel's to deliver him from fire and brimstone and destruction.  He is a prophet.  We are supposed to believe Lot became so drunk that he did not know he was having sex with his own daughter's.  And lastly, the harshness of the  immediate death of Lot's wive for the simple act of looking behind her to see what was going on between God and the city she called home was worthy of instant death.   The women of this story are not protected, are given no mercy, and do not fare well at all.  The women are traumatized, judged and put to death by God.  Lot's wife was not valuable enough to preserve and his daughter's were victims of incest in which they are blamed.

The moral of the story is God's extraordinary measure of sending "angels" to deliver Lot out of an "evil" city.  In ancient times it was imperative that everyone lived in a tribe in order to preserve traditions and beliefs.  The whole moral of the story is that  God has "special" people that he goes to extraordinary measures to take care of and the rest of the world he does not care about.  This is called "exceptionalism".  Being a part of a "preferred" religious group that God approves of gives you an extraordinary measure of God's favor necessary for survival.  Humanity outside the exceptional group is doomed. This ideology is pervasive in modern day christianity, judaism and islam.  Whole groups of people believe their beliefs are exceptional and their group is exceptional and that God views them as special and deserving of favor and deliverance from hell.  This story was no doubt useful for centuries to keep the tribal lineage and tribal lore intact, and has been useful to keep people rigidly in fear of God's judgement and anger against people who disobey in the slightest way. (Lot's wife)  Lot as the patriarch was given a pass.  He was not corrected when he offered his daughters to be raped.  He was not corrected for becoming drunk and impregnating his daughter's.  The women of the story were traumatized and judged.  It is only in the past century that women have won some rights.  Male dominated religions and male dominated cultures have kept women from equality for centuries.  How do you see women as dominated even today by the church and society?  Does the pope care about women's rights? Are male pastors willing to see women as equal?  Why has the equal rights amendment failed to be ratified and obstructed by the "moral majority" and women such as Phyllis Shafly and Beverly LaHaye?  Has Sarah Palin used the feminist movement to her benefit, but denies girls sex education and birth control even within her own family?  The current republican candidate for Senate in Nevada does not believe victims of rape and incest have a right to terminate their pregnancy as the pregnancy is an "act of God's will".  She has obviously not been a victim of rape or incest and forced to carry and deliver and raise a baby from these crimes.  This is fake feminism for it does not value the women's rights.  Fear of God's wrath and fear of certain doom drive our society today.  Michelle Duggar has 19 children because she is afraid not having children is against God's will for her.  She sees herself as useful only as it pertains to bearing children and claims she will not stop even if it means her death.  She is no doubt influenced by Lot's wife and Lot's daughter's who felt they only had value to God by birthing children.  All the above mentioned women work very hard at being "exceptional" and "favored" to the harm to those around them.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

The command of silence and childbearing (I Timothy 2 11-15)

I Timothy 2:11-15
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.  For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in  the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."

Wow....Paul the Apostle has put a lot on women here.  It took two thousand years of world history and over 150 years of  American history to break free from these teachings for women to have a voice in their male dominated cultures. 

First of all, Genesis 1:27 says God created male and female in his own image...all at once...and equally.  At a later point, during a period of patriarchy,  another creation story surfaced about Adam needed a "helper" and God creating Eve as an afterthought from Adam's rib for the benefit of Adam.  For thousands of years men preferred to treat women as little more than a slave for his personal benefit.  Women were "purchased" from the father's for a price.  Women had no power and very few rights, they were born into a man's world dominated by a male religion.  The struggle for equality first surfaced in 1850 in the first wave of the women's liberation movement.  In addition to men, women were some of the most vocal opponents of equality.  Over time the women's movement merged with the prohibition movement and although alcohol was made illegal, women still had not succeeded in securing the right to vote. The history of the women's movement and prohibition is a very interesting study of american history.  A new book called LAST CALL goes into the details of prohibition in america. 

Secondly, Paul the Apostle blames Eve and thus all women for the "fall of mankind" and "disobedience" to God. This is absurd.  This allowed the church to insinuate for years that women just could not be trusted as leaders and the western world was forced into a male dominated and male controlled society that denied women equality, both inside the church and outside the church.   Adam blamed Eve and men have been blaming women for eons.  Paul picks up this rant and uses an old testament fable to insinuate that women are 1. Not equal in intellect or character to men.   2. Women are easily decieved and therefore not qualified to lead and 3.bearing children can somehow save a woman.  Here is why Paul injects something totally new.  Women save themselves  from hell by having children.  Women who are barren, or whose husband's are infertile are given no hope of saving themselves from an everlasting hell by Paul.  This is just ridiculous and a new twist.  The church picked up on this, as have men.  Women have been forced into early motherhood and the burden of motherhood against their will.  Today, the one way to assure a young woman of lifelong poverty is to force her to remain pregnant and bear children at a young age causing her development and educational opportunities to nearly cease. 

Paul states that women can be saved if they have children, continue in "faith" and "give liberally" and remain "sober".  I don't know if that means depressed or free from alcohol or both.  This is quite a  quilt trip on women.  I think women would be well advised to read the teachings of Paul with caution as he is clearly not a fan of women.

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Dear President Bush (a letter off the internet)

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18: 22 clearly states it to be an abomination . . End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25: 44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21: 7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1: 9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35: 2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11: 10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

7. Lev. 21: 20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19: 19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blasphemes a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20: 14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, as well, you have a direct line to God so I am confident you can help

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

(post taken from an anonymous source off the internet)

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Stoning Women to Death

Stoned to Death -- Iranian Woman Faces Barbaric Execution

Women in the bible did not fare any better.  John 8: 1-11 A women was brought to Jesus who was taken in adultery.  They said that Moses said in the law (Dueteronomy 22:22-23) that she should be stoned.  Jesus said, "He who is without sin cast the first stone."  Upon thinking of this statement the men left the woman alone. 

During the time of Jesus the Israelites lived under Roman Law on the Romans were the rulers of the land.  The Romans did not observe the practice of stoning virgins who had broken an engagement vow and women who were accused adulterers. I suspect that the religious temple police could not go about stoning whoever they found to accuse as the romans had set up the government and the courts.  The roman government and their court system may have prevented this practice of stoning women.  At any rate,  in a male dominated culture and religion only the virgins have value and women do not have the right to love whom they choose.  It is only when the whole world moves past man made, male dominated religions that condone barbaric practices can women move forward. It is very important to visualize and embrace the female half of god, as both men and women are made in the image of God.
Numbers 21:13-24
This passage tells the hebrews what is required of the priests. They have to marry a virgin. A priest cannot take a widow or a divorcee or a harlot or a "profane" woman. He has to take a virgin of his own people. He cannot take a virgin outside the tribe.

This passage begins to set up an expectation that only virgins are valuable and worthy of marriage to a priest. A widow, or divorcee simply cannot be considered even though she may have excellent character. The bible is replete with the "worship" of virgins. 2,000 years after the birth of Christ, Mary, the virgin mother is worshipped. Mary had to be a virgin in order for Jesus to be considered worthy of the title of prophet, thus the preoccupation with a virgin birth.

It is not that I am against the practice of abstinence if that is the choice for either a young man or young woman, but to lend to them a "higher" human value because of that choice seems to devalue all humanity. We are either equal and of equal value or we are not. Westerners are troubled by muslims demanding and fantasizing over virgins, and yet our culture and the religions of judaism and christianity are equally preoccupied with attaching worth to virgins and removing worth from people with a different lifechoice or experience. Women have value whether they are a virgin, a divorcee, a widow, a prostitute or a lesbian. Only with this worldview stronly intact can this world progress to a more humane planet.