Simple Immorality

The Pope has condemned the UK's proposed Equality Bill for being in violation of natural law and for imposing "unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities", saying that these communities should fight the Bill with "missionary zeal"! He has stated his opinion so strongly because the Bill, in its current form, would take away some of the Church's liberties to deny employment rights for homosexuals. Even though priests and ministers will still be allowed these archaic homophobic rights, no other position of employment within the British Catholic Church will be. Archbishop Vincent Nichols, the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, has stated that the Pope's reasoned voice has been "formed by the treasures of the Christian heritage". So not only are these two highly influential religious voices failing to understand that there's no such thing as 'natural law' - a socially constructed concept with no basis in fact as there are plenty of examples of homosexuality in other animal species - but they are also blatantly proving that Catholicism (and probably Christianity by default!) is discriminatory, prejudiced and wholly incapable of producing a morality that is compatible with modern times.
Staunch Catholic Ann Widdecombe MP has also felt compelled to contribute, saying that this is a debate about religious freedom rather than homosexuality. But what about the freedom of homosexuals to not be repressed in a democratic society? At which point does it become okay for anyone, regardless of their religious viewpoints, to say that a person is not allowed to fill a position of employment based purely on their sexual orientation, which shouldn't even have to be disclosed in the first place?! By a simple application of logic, if anti-discrimination legislation is open to exemptions, then it is still allowing discrimination; and religious freedom cannot be labelled as free if it is repressing others who are trying to be free.
Even though the disappointing opinions were hardly surprising from the decadent pontiff, I hope that most UK politicians will not listen to the simple immorality that has been spouted. Sadly, Gordon Brown has said it would be inappropriate for him to comment ... Coward!

Poor judgement

Gordon Brown has stated for the record that he is against any new legislation to make assisted suicide legal. He says that the government shouldn't "put pressure on people to end their lives". But that misses the point. Making a law stating that someone who is severely ill or disabled (but who is unable to commit suicide due to that illness or disability) can ask somebody else to help with the suicide without fear of legal repercussions, is simply not the same as coercing somebody to take their own life. Brown's opinion that they are the same thing reeks of political spin in an attempt to avoid getting too deeply involved in something that could have a detrimental effect on his popularity. It is not as if a law would result in people killing others and then using the defence of assisted suicide as an excuse to get away with murder! The law could easily be implemented around an institution like the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland where professionals and counsellors are on hand to ensure that the person wishing to die is in no way being manipulated into it before giving them the means to end it all. But of course, Gordon Brown stated these opinions when in discussion with Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor (who for some reason always insists that his middle name is reported in news stories!), the head of the Catholic Church in England; I should have known that the dubious morality was coming from the religious lobby and decadent scripture; it's just terribly unfortunate that the Prime Minister of a country is so easily manipulated himself. Perhaps Brown is worried that if he did pass an assisted dying law someone would convince him to commit suicide. Or perhaps politics and religion are just far too intertwined for the occurrence of any social progression.

Hindu Bullshit

Why am I even having to write this new post on my blog? Why does society tolerate such obsessive religious nonsense? The Skanda Vale in Wales recently has been the place for legal wranglings concernings Shambo (what the fuck?!) the bull. Shambo was diagnosed many weeks ago with bovine TB but was not immediately slaughtered as would usually be the case because this bull was considered sacred by a group of Hindu monks. Are you kidding me?! If this bull had been transported even short distances across the country it could have infected herds of cows causing farmers to lose their livelihoods; and farmers who had already lost their livelihoods through such an epidemic must have been livid at the blatant double standards. Let's also not forget that bovine TB has the potential to infect humans; frankly I wouldn't have particularly cared if the monks had been infected but they could then have taken it outside their 'sanctuary' and allowed it to pass to innocent hard-working people.
Thankfully, yesterday a group of police officers were finally allowed to barge their way in and take the bull to the slaughterhouse, an act which should have been carried out weeks ago instead of having to wade through acres of possibly infectious red tape! This is simply another example of how religion causes more problems than it solves. I only wish Michael Jackson had been there to scream out "Shambo!"

Abort the Catholics!

Yesterday Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Scotland's most senior Roman Catholic (RC), stated that RC politicians who are pro-choice regarding abortion were no longer particularly welcome in the RC church. He said that abortion was a "social evil", an "unspeakable crime", a "wanton killing of innocents", and that children were being "murdered in their mothers' womb". In one speech, Mr O'Brien managed to set back the morality of Roman Catholics about 40 years.
In 1967, abortion was legalised (along with homosexuality, another thing which sticks in the craw of the Catholic faith) because it was deemed by intelligent politicians that all women had the right to choose whether they wanted to have a baby or not, and by intelligent scientists that the extremely limited level of consciousness demonstrated by a foetus in the first trimester of birth was not nearly enough to constitute murder. Since then, although abortion is quite rightly not something that society takes lightly, it has become generally understood that sometimes giving birth is a really terrible decision for a woman to be forced into. For instance, if a woman were to get pregnant after having being raped, how can any religion say that this is an act of God (probably working in his 'mysterious ways') and that the woman should then have to live with that bastard child for the rest of her life. I wonder what Mr O'Brien would say if one of his female relatives got pregnant like this; would he truly tell her that to have the pregnancy terminated is against God's will and could damn her to Hell?! Surely that attitude is significantly sicker than condoning pro-choice for abortion. The excessive, inflammatory and just downright conceited language that the Cardinal used in his speech could be damaging to young ladies who gave in to temptation one night and then felt manipulated by her family's religious zeal to live with her mistake by never again being given the chance of independence (or at least not for another 16 years). Penalties like this are simply too harsh in a modern society of opportunity. If only there were a gene for religion then genetic screening of foetuses could take place so that all Roman Catholic's could be aborted! This might stink a little of ethnic cleansing, but no more than what RCs believe will happen to us heathens after we die: an eternity in Hell while they bathe in the luxury of Heaven.
Really all Keith O'Brien is doing is preaching a culture of fear. A power-mongering obsessive who can't bear to relinquish his control over the society around him, and would quake in his boots if he had to admit that his own warped upbringing was incorrect. His words are despicable and should make the Roman Catholic faith feel utterly ashamed. But of course they will mew and follow him like blind sheep, because most religious followers lack the capacity for independent thought. Therefore I forward a motion here and now that all primary school pupils, when being taught collective nouns in English class - a school of whales, a coven of witches - are taught the phrase 'An abortion of Catholics'!

Slightly scary scientology

Last night on a BBC Panorama documentary, many of the negative aspects of religion were demonstrated. Tommy Davis, a head figure in the scientology movement (that's right, the organisation which celebrities like Tom Cruise and John Travolta try to convince us is A-okay), effectively stalked and intimidated a BBC journalist. Davis would participate in haranguing the interviewer if the current interviewee was known to harbour opinions which were unfavourable to scientology, attacking the journalist with a Nazi-type conversational style - interrupting and talking over his opposition, then storming away before a response could be delivered. It made Davis look like a childish control freak at best, and a dictatorial monster at worst. Other figures in the scientology movement (including celebrities) were initially willing to take part in the documentary, but then pulled out if the wrong questions were asked. I understand that media reports can never be entirely objective and that a longer documentary than half an hour to explore all of the facts in depth would have been an improvement; but there's no doubt in my mind that scientology - and certainly Tommy Davis - has anything ranging from deep insecurity issues to ideas of world domination! The only thing I would really agree with them on is that if so many people do believe in the principles of scientology (and there are many in America), then it has just as much right to call itself a religion than any other organised group of worshippers; it shouldn't really be labelled as a cult anymore. It's just a really fucked up religion!
As with all religions, the need to belong somewhere and to feel that you're special does not give anybody a 'God-given' right to tell anybody else what to do. I wouldn't dream of indiscriminately confronting a scientologist in an attempt to rip their beliefs to pieces (even though I probably could), and yet I wonder after the bizarre behaviour I saw last night whether I'll wake up tomorrow morning to find that my binbags have been raided and a strange darkened vehicle is following me!. Let's hope so, I could do with some excitement to write about in my next blog!