Religious Drug Use Ok, Medicinal...Not So Much

I find it hard to believe that some religious people can get away with using illegal drugs while cancer patients who use marijuana for relief of nausea get charged and convicted. Medicinal marijuana use is illegal in the US while in Canada, it is not. The debates still rage among medical professionals and scientists as to whether marijuana is more harmful or beneficial to cancer patients, those with glaucoma, AIDS, MS, etc. Still, I think that people suffering from these diseases should be allowed to decide themselves whether to use marijuana or not. If it helps some people ease their suffering, why not let them? Marijuana, in my opinion, is no worse than alcohol. In fact, I believe that alcohol is far worse and far more damaging to our society than marijuana ever will be. And if you are one of those people who believe that marijuana is a gateway drug, then you'd be wrong and it would do you good to do some research.

It is more than a stretch to say that the legalization of marijuana would lead to legalization of cocaine or heroin; it's a bloody leap.

Among Christians in the US, opinion seems to be divided on the whole issue of marijuana legalization. Both sides can point to passages in the Bible to support their stands. But is this really the best way to decide whether to legalize marijuana? I think not. The Bible is notorious for contradictions and by using it to decide whether something should be legal or not in the 21st century is absurd. Killing disrespecting children is condoned in the Bible; it's actually the proper punishment. So, should we look to the Old Testament to decide what is allowable here and now? The New Testament, perhaps? How about neither?

The Bible is not the moral law of the United States, though many would like it to be, and as such it should have no bearing deciding the legality of anything. Religion just muddles things up.

Read more

An Atheist Video Game

The objective of a new computer game that hasn't been released yet, will be to stop the spread of Christianity and Islam. Players try to stop the spread of these two religions by killing the Bible's authors and the prophet, Muhammad. While I strongly believe in free speech and expressing oneself freely, I am a bit worried about the consequences for the creator. (He obviously is too, since he didn't want to reveal his name fearing his safety.) Most everyone knows what happened when that Danish cartoon of the Islamic prophet came out. That's what sucks in our society. Religious fundies get so fucking worked up that it's not unimaginable to resort to violence when it comes to their religions. But it's alright to attack the faithless and nonreligious. That really pisses me off. And while not all atheists are cool and collected, at least there is no history of suicide bombings and mass killings in the name of Atheism.

I just hope religious people don't overreact and see this as a threat to their beliefs. It's just an expression of someone else's beliefs. Namely, that the world would be a better place without Christianity and Islam. You don't have to agree with it but you also don't have a right to tell others how they can express themselves either.

Read more

More Reasons Why the Vatican Sucks

The following is a list of 21st century sins unveiled by the Vatican:

• genetic manipulation (stem cell research)
• pollution (climate change)
• social injustice
• drugs

Let's start with genetic manipulation. Stem cell research will hopefully one day lead to cures to the most debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease and Multiple Sclerosis. Just because an embryo has the potential of becoming a human being does not justify banning stem cell research. And maybe the destruction of embryos will no longer be necessary. And when it comes to aborted foetuses, why not use the foetuses for stem cell research. The reality is that abortions happen and if the aborted foetuses can do some good, then so be it. Screw the Vatican. It's not like many people listen to them anyway.

On to pollution. Polluting is a sin according to the Vatican. Wow, I guess that was the only way of convincing religious freaks who don't believe scientists, that global warming is actually happening. Leave it to the church to convince idiots of scientific facts that most people already knew to be the truth. That is pathetic. Maybe the Vatican should declare that being an ignorant religious fucker is a sin too.

Ah, social injustice. My favourite. They dare to say that the gap between the rich and the poor is an "unbearable social injustice." Really? How much money does the Vatican have? A few billion. Fuckers. Isn't it their sole purpose to help people including the poor. But no, it's more important to have huge Cathedrals and stocks of gold to bribe politicians and influence legislation. The only way the Catholic Church or any other for that matter helps the poorest of the poor is by converting them to Christianity first. Like in Africa. Yeah, we'll feed you but only if you accept Jesus as your personal saviour. If I say no, can I still be fed? Give me a fucking break, you hypocritical fuckers.

And finally, drugs. Drugs. I love drugs. Not the illegal kind, but the painkilling kind. Girotti, an official at the Vatican for sins or some other nonsense, says that drugs "weaken the mind and obscure intelligence." Hmm, I thought religion did that. Oops, my bad. He was probably referring to illegal drugs which I guess I have to agree with. At least he's not recommending vitamins to treat psychiatric disorders like some dumb famous fucker that likes jumping off of people's couches who shall remain nameless.

Now that I've covered all the new sins for the 21st Century as put forth by the Vatican, there's only one thing left to say.

Fuck you, Vatican. You seriously blow.

Read more

Asinine Bible Passages Part I

The following are some of the stupidest passages I found in the so-called "Good Book".

A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.

Deuteronomy 22:5

So I guess that means that God hates transvestites, cross-dressers and pretty much 90% of the female population, at least those women in the West who have the right to wear pants. Lovely.

The Lord will wash away the filth of the women of Zion;

Isaiah 4:4

All the women of Zion are filthy. Again, how lovely. Nowhere did I find a passage that said the same about all men. And maybe there is some but I doubt it's as prevalent as the ones about women.

The following passage clearly shows that the Bible was written by a bunch of ignorant men who were terrified of the unknown, that is women's bodies in particular.

Say to the Israelites: A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood. These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.

Leviticus 12:2-6

For women who give birth to daughter, twice as much time has to pass than if she had given birth to a son, for her purification to be complete. How fucking retarded and sexist is that. I hate the damn Bible.

And here are some more fucked up passages.

Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. Then they can train the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

Titus 2:3-5

Not too much wine. Fuck that.

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Here's more about menstruation. Oh yeah, these are the best. What a bunch of crapola.

When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he will be unclean till evening. If a man lies with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean. When a woman has a discharge of blood for many days at a time other than her monthly period or has a discharge that continues beyond her period, she will be unclean as long as she has the discharge, just as in the days of her period. Any bed she lies on while her discharge continues will be unclean, as is her bed during her monthly period, and anything she sits on will be unclean, as during her period. Whoever touches them will be unclean; he must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening.

Leviticus 15:19-27

After reading this nonsense I wonder how any self-respecting woman who calls herself a Christian could possibly believe that these passages came from God. And even if they did, then all women should silent and subject to their husbands and only wear dresses and skirts. I mean seriously, who does that nowadays. And yet there are so many women who call themselves religious and read the Bible. So why don't they see how sexist and degrading this word of God book really is. If it is the word of God then everything in it must be true and all Christians should then act in accordance with it.

The thing that annoys me is the way Christians would just pick and choose what to believe in the Bible and then find some retarded justification for the passages they didn't agree with.

The whole thing shows you, that is if you are not deluded, that the Bible was written by men in a time when women were secondary citizens who were treated as if they were children.

And maybe some of you really are if you can't see through this book of propaganda.

By the way, all this nonsense comes from the New International Version.

Read more