Religion

Pronunciation:

\ri-ˈli-jən\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely

Date:

13th century

1. The function of possessing all the answers, with substantiated evidence, without actually possessing any of the true answers

What a laugh and a half.

Mormons are up there with Scientologists in the crazy fucking belief section. Zenu brought us here 75 million years ago and gathered us around volcanoes and blew them up with H-bombs. Yeah, right. Elohiem lives on planet Kolob and the Garden of Eden is in Missouri. Let me tell you, I've been to Missouri, and there's a lot more farm land there than any gardens of Eden.

We all know Scientology is really out there, but obviously people (especially anyone associated with the Church of Latter Day Saints) don't think Mormonism a little off.

This Joseph Smith, which is by all accounts a false prophet, is a grade-A bullshitter. I think he wanted power, not just any power though, everlasting power. So he used an established religion to gain it. Now he's on of the three Mormons supposedly meet after their death.

This religion does a lot of good shit that doesn't have to do with the religion itself, but the religion is just so God damned stupid you wonder why so many people follow this guy's raves. If a Morman were to look at it from an outside perspective, they would see what everyone who really doesn't like the Mormons sees, complete and utter insanity. Of course, if they choose to leave the religion it's social suicide. That's the only con I see to denouncing Joseph Smith as a dude who is insane. Also, I think it's very stupid that he said Jesus came to the Americas to preach to the Native Americans. Historically there's no evidence, and sanely there's no evidence that should lead people to believe that ever happened. This religion is stupid, and by all acounts insane. I'd like to implore people to see that.

On a side note, one of my friends turned out to be Mormon, she believes this junk, and she doesn't want to hear doubt on the subject or questioning of her belief system. With me, that loses you a host of respect real quick. I'm just sorry she believes this guy... It's baffling.

Another two cents:

I got to thinking for a bit waiting for the bus. I thought about Genesis and all its creation stories and what not. And I came to one conclusion: It is the only purely human creation contained within any bible. It is the only book in which I believe if this god truly exists, did not have any hand in. I just don't see a god laying down creation of the universe so simply like that, because in all honesty if this god is out there, it's not quite done creating yet.

I figure this because this book stresses divinity of this creation and in turn divinity of man, something I think this god truly isn't partial to. No god would stress divinity of its creation, only its creation would stress the fact that were a part of the divine creation. With this I'd like to go to the Creationism Museum and present this, and a little game called Spore to people there. While I know that they would like to dispute this, I'm not there to dispute the rest of the Bible, I'm just there to present findings and what I see to be proof of the findings.

Plus, this book has all the answers in a time where there were no answers, it's self-explanatory.

On Spore, I would like to say that the game stresses the importance of an intelligent designer in evolution. I'm not certain this is true or not, but it sure is a good little piece of pie to chew on for awhile. I think that if any god were to create a universe, because it could, it would create that universe and make the possibility of life a reality. Over time it'd watch the evolution going on, maybe pushing a species ahead or pulling one back with mass catastrophe, but it wouldn't be the one to create sentient beings right off the bat. It would have the patience to wait. Wait until sentient beings came to be and then attempt to teach them to live in peace if they hadn't done it on their own already. We hadn't, and still haven't, so who knows if he's done or not.

Revelation, I think, though could have been inspired by this god, that is why I don't think that book is purely human creation, though a lot of it is. That's what I mean by 'not done yet' this god dictated to people what it was going to do because it saw no point in trying to teach us to live peacefully. As many Gandhis, Siddhartha Gautamas, Martin Luther King Jrs and peacemakers alike live, this god has seen us as killers of the peacemakers (citing Gandhi and MLK Jr.). It's all up to debate, but that's what I think.

Also, I think the Ten Commandments are a very human creation. My moral standards are better than those ten pieces of stupid advice. But if it is truly 'God's Word,' then I'll point some things out.

As you know I'm Henotheistic, well, so is God. He says, "You shall have no other gods before Me." Well? He isn't saying 'there are no other gods, so worship only me' He's acknowledging that there is other gods out there and that you should only worship Him. Also, in that he is not saying you can't worship them, He's just saying don't worship them 'before Me.' So in all honesty, He's not saying that you can't worship other gods, just that He's the top dog. Remind you of Zeus, or Krishna, or Vishnu? Supreme gods? Yeah, God just wants to be on top. But this one is at odds with one of the Five Pillars of Islam, which states There is but one God, Allah, and his prophet is Muhammad. Truthfully, Islam is a pure monotheism with that.

Second, "You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." We've been doing that all throughout history, he didn't say that to me, at all. Yes, these images may have been for teaching the Bible to illiterate masses, but a lot of the representations of all the things listed are in all art. And there's nothing anyone can do about it. This to me is enough confirmation that Christian people don't follow their own Commandments (even though these are Jewish).

Third, "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain." God dammit. Well? Where's the fire and brimstone we've all been promised? This one is just people afraid of a little language. These people like their 'tongues' as well, and who knows if they're actually saying something they shouldn't be saying or not? No one? Didn't think so.

Forth, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" This one comes from the bullshit in Genesis where god rested on the seventh day because it's just sooooo hard to create a universe. This is people who want a day off. That's all.

Fifth, "Honor your father and your mother." This one is nice, especially in the fact that it's not solely patriarchal. But it really isn't a commandment, or a law or anything, this is just something that you should instinctively do and usually instinctively do anyways.

Sixth, "You shall not murder." Bam! Finally a law! Wow, took you a lot of thought to get up to this point didn't it? Yeah. Well... I think this is one of two actual laws in this these commandments that are so full of stupid. But in all truth, sentient beings usually come to this consensus without religion to tell them.

Seventh, "You shall not commit adultery." Happens, no fire and brimstone yet. This one is just plain stupid. Humans fuck, there's no way to get around that. It's part of your lowest instincts. Now I admit it's a dick thing to do, but it's not as sinful as people like to say it is.

Eighth, "You shall not steal." Hey! The other actual law! This is a no brainer, stealing is a hassle. Hammurabi made sure of that. We don't need these Commandments to tell us that stealing is bad, we have laws that are set in even more solid stone to tell us it's stupid.

Ninth, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." This is just a good piece of advice. You have to be a real asshat to bear false witness, and you actually deserve Hell for this one. It's also illegal without this to tell us that it should be.

And tenth, "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.' This one is basically no envy. Envy isn't bad though, it can be stupid, but it isn't sinful to want that Maserati in you're neighbor's driveway, just see number eight and keep these thoughts to yourself.

But yeah, this is a lot of human stuff that is outdated today and forsaking crimes against humanity. It either needs to be thrown out, or updated. So, God, update!

If I end up being completely wrong about everything when I die, the only request I'll have is a short chat with God to ask him some pressing questions about things I want to know. But either way, I'm contented.

So, I just watched 'Jesus Camp.'

It's a documentary about extremist fundamental Evangelicals, and it is full of a lot of laughs, and a lot of stupid.

Now, I'm a Henotheist myself, and partial to the god I've devised myself, but still I don't really like to deny the existence of the others (mainly the Judeo-Christian-Muslim god [Yahweh, God, Allah, all the same god, different name]) because I just don't know (I admit it would be nice if it was mine who existed). But yeah, I don't like it when they preach their beliefs (especially to me) in such a contradictory way (watch the movie and you'll see how if you know anything about Christianity). They're exactly like extremist Muslims in their way of teaching, all gung ho about 'laying down their life' for their 'cause.' Usually the Christian cause isn't so damned stupid (citing Palestinian asshattery for the past five decades. Did they learn anything from Gandhi and MLK Jr.?).

Enough of that. My opinion on that may come at a later time.

This isn't a review on Jesus Camp, because I filed it under 'Comedy' because I found it so funny. This is just a little on the stupid that is extremist fundamentalist Evangelicalism.

First off, because I really want to say this to a host of Evangelicals:

"Do you know whether or not that abortion is God's way of denying the lives of people he thinks aren't worthy to live? I don't, but do you? Do you know whether or not He wants them there by His side immediately instead of being here on this rather divided Earth? Do you? Because I don't, and yet it seems to be the most logical answer to abortion to me."

I think that would be both a comical, and serious question, because I want to know what they would really respond to that with.

Anyways, in Jesus Camp, one of the guys said that when Evangelicals vote, they 'decide the election.' Yeah, right. Why isn't McCain president-elect then? Pfft, it is the young voters and non-voters that decide the election, especially this time around. Because as religious as Obama is, he is not Evangelical, and he is not extremist (but Palin was, a hee hee! And where is she now? Grabbing at any little thing that will keep her in the news and trying to solidify herself as the 2012 front runner for the Republican party... Yeah, right). Eh, that was tangential... Yeah, Obama did not get a lot of the Evangelical vote, mainly because of that big red reverse 'L' in the election results map and the low numbers in those states. My point? It was the young, (hopefully) mostly subjective (religious) people that decided this latest election.

Also, I'd like to point out something I saw in a Survivor show. It was, I think, the season opener of Survivor: China, and they were asking for enlightenment in a Buddhist temple. One of the contestants on that deplorable show was a Christian radio host. I'm sure she wasn't extremest or anything, and if I remember right, she was voted off the second or third time. But yeah, she said after she had left the temple before the prayer was over and they showed one of those private camera clips of her and she said something like this, "One of the ten Commandments says 'you shall not bow to any god before me' and that's what I was doing" or something amazingly stupid like that. I wanted to just punch her. Siddhartha Gautama is NOT, I repeat, NOT a god. He was a man who had reached ultimate Nirvana (no, not that band), the ultimate enlightenment. He was more a teacher than anything. And also, there is definitely more than ONE Buddha! Also, Buddhism is more philosophy that religion for all you dumbshits out there. Also, I heard that some Buddhist scholars were teaching that Jesus and Siddhartha were friends. Hey! That's a concept you fucking Evangelicals! Think about that!

That brings me into something about Islam, I have seen frescoes, mosaics, and painting depicting Jesus and Muhammad (and once Moses there too) riding side by side as if they were homies. There's another concept! Traditionally, even though Saul of Tarsus opened Christianity to anyone and everyone, Islam and its Muslims have been a lot more accepting over the lat one and a half millennia. Usually it had to do with the fact that Muslims didn't have to pay taxes, so they needed a tax base, but still there was tolerance, something that didn't happen much in early Christianities (yes, in the beginning of Christianity, Christianity was plural because there was more than one 'official' doctrine practiced throughout the Mediterranean world). Also, both Moses and Jesus are considered Islamic prophets, just nowhere near as important as Muhammad, whose bit was that he revealed the 'final truth' of God's (Allah's, their name for God) word. Which if you've heard of that Israeli site which breaks down the Qur'an to its most fundamental and best teachings, would realize that Islam is just as good as Christianity, and in some places, much better.

Okay, enough of the Humanities... One things that really tweaks my melon is the fact that children are used as tools, and are melded and indoctrinated as if they are cattle. This doesn't just happen in fundamentalist, extremist Evangelicals, but in extremist Muslims and in places where a quick soldier is needed (especially in rebel African, and South American groups). I say, teach your children, but don't indoctrinate them, it's brainwashing. Let them grow up and decide the path they want to take. Let them decide if they want to be stupid creationists or stupid natural selectionists or stupid Republicans or stupid Democrats. Don't turn them into Christians, let them decide.

I'm not glad that this Jesus camp thing closed down to find a 'more secure' location for their camp so stupid vandals and atheist retards won't harm them. I'd like to learn Latin, find a Latin Bible and preach to them how it was done for a thousand years. Because they are indeed, the very much so uneducated masses.

That's my two cents for now. I rant a lot about religion, because it's fun.

Education

Now, I've been in this system for 12 years and in some sort of schooling for a little over 15 years. The biggest thing I've realized about it is that this system either leaves students behind, or pushes students ahead. There isn't any middle ground where students just sit there and do exactly what is needed to graduate. Either they graduate with a host of extra credits, just enough, or none at all and no diploma to boot. It sucks, painfully, to see the the amount of dropouts and shitty students (look it up, because I don't feel like it). I'd like to change the way the education system works, though I don't see my idea as perfect.

What I say is a complete overhaul of the current established American education system. From preschool to high school (college is fine just the way it is to me).

First, daycare centers would go out of business, because they aren't doing a whole hell of a lot of teaching of kids (at least the majority aren't). I think that preschool should be a time where kids are learning things, like languages and what not. I would like to see preschool be a four year time in a young child's life. From age one, to age five they should be in an environment that are teaching them things. For example, languages. The current system teaches languages at the wrong time completely. As a child, all the child has to do is listen to someone speak the language and they'll probably be able to speak, or at least understand it by the time they realize that they can speak it. So, for four years between age one and five the child should be taught all the major European languages considering the influence Latin has had on most of them. And also the major Asian languages as well. You'd just need to have a host of people talk to these kids in all these languages and you have people that are quite multilingual as they should be.

For elementary school the basics should be taught and grammar should be brought back as a staple of education because it really hasn't been taught for the last century in America. By the end of kindergarten children should have a simple social understanding (with all the coloring and what not that's usually taught, because it's just fun). They should also have the foundation for writing set in stone, not actual writing solidified, but their foundations. You know what I mean. By first grade the children should be taught how to create writing (all the while continuing in the languages they learned in preschool). This is when grammar should start and be taught. Simple math concepts should also be introduced. How to add and subtract and negative numbers, because negative numbers aren't introduced until middle school in most places. Students should already know them at this point.

In second grade, the beginnings of multiplication and division should also be taught and continued on all throughout the year. More grammar should be learned as well as cooperation skills and work ethic in groups. Because I'm tired of one or two people doing all the work in a group of five. You might say that a first and second grader really wouldn't be able to comprehend negative numbers and what not, but that's what we're here to find out. This is also when the concept, concept, of zero should be introduced.

In third grade, more of a math-based curriculum should be instated. Adding and subtracting (and negative numbers' concepts) should be already learned in full, and multiplication and division should be solidified in this (with the addition of negative numbers), as well as continuing on grammar and writing. With that, I remember learning cursive, but I can't write it now. That should be solidified completely in the mind of the student so they know how to write it. Because it is indeed a fast way to get information on the page. I've met no one that can type faster than they can write cursive. I'm sure someone can, but not everyone can.

In fourth grade, usually fractions and the like are introduced, so we should continue this and be taught the improper fractions, negative fractions, reciprocals and the like. Multiplication of all these concepts and the rest. Blah, blah, blah. All that fun math stuff we so look forward to. In fourth grade creative writing should be introduced and a whole couple months should be spent on this concept. Creativity is an important part of learning (no, I didn't forget to mention music, that all should be in here too). The sciences should also be introduced in fourth grade...

... and continued into fifth grade, where the creative writing should be worked on again, but then transitioned into more of a technical writing curriculum. That would greatly improve writing if we didn't have to teach people this shit later when 'lethargy' kicks in (like it did in my case). This is also when geometry should be introduced, because geometry is a lot easier to comprehend than straight algebra (because shapes are tangible). With geometry should come an introduction to algebra, nothing extremely complex, just enough to ready children for middle school.

Middle school should be different too. Yes, this hellish transition period where you don't really learn anything, but don't really forget anything either.

The period system should be kept. Yes, it should. And remember the languages? Yeah, the classes should all be taught in different languages as to solidify them in the mind, and make writing in these languages mandatory.

Sixth grade should have a host of required classes. The math classes should be broken down to semester classes teaching fundamentals, not entire curriculum like they are today. Pre-algebra, and pre-geometry should be taught consecutively one semester after the other (pre-algebra first, because I'm a dick and want your children to suffer). There should be a science class as there already is but a more centralized concept curriculum, because there is, after all, three years in most middle school cases. There should be two elective periods, period. Electives are dying, and they need to stay. It's pissing me off that school systems are doing away with the arts. That's four periods, one of these should encompass a semester of physical education as it already does most places, with a semester of health education following it. The other period should be the english/study skills period, where you do a lot more writing and what not and learn to be a student.

No, I didn't forget about Social Studies, that comes later. Oh, did I also mention that this will be advanced placement pace? We aren't just going to push these kids, we're going to shove them. To weed out who really needs the 'special treatment' (which will be the same exact curriculum, but a slower pace, and a lot more explaining).

In seventh grade the social studies should be introduced. They should be a joint semester course of world history and geography (because we really suck at finding Iraq on the map).
There should be another semester of PE and health to teach all the more about the healthy stuff we require to know. Another English/writing class, because the study skills should already be learned. And the math should be at least a simple algebra/geometry course to take up a period of the year (all these still in the various languages that should have been learned). And the sciences should again strain in yet another direction from what they did the previous year. Yes, you guessed it, only one elective class this year (and next), because we need to get in a groove here. The semester electives will be the same though.

Eighth grade will be exactly the same, except you'll be in a fundamental (but with more advanced stuff) algebra class getting you ready for the specialized classes in high school. This is when social studies should be transitioned to a huge whole year class just on American history, because immigrants learn more about the US than students in US history. There should be one last period of PE/Health in eighth grade, and one more semester of sciences each straining in their own direction. Then again, the arts electives we don't have any longer.

High school! Yay! Lets party! No, lets not. We're still in advanced placement style classes, we should have weeded out all the dumbshits, so we now can get into the real work.

I'm not going to go by grade this time, I'm going by curriculum. The maths should not be one after the other, they should be specialized, because all throughout high school you should be figuring out just what you want to do. There should be specialized class sets that teach all the fundamentals of higher algebra, up to calculus and statistics and all that fun math. leading your way to a more math-specialized career. There should be a basic math system that teaches you up through the applied maths of algebra, getting you ready for a more broad spectrum career (this one will probably be the most common system taken). And there should also be another math series that is just applied math, from everything to calories, to your tax returns to banking (so you know when a ponzi scheme is coming). That class, in my humble opinion would help a lot of people be able to function as normal citizens.

English classes would run differently, there would be yet another specialized writing class in ninth grade that would do a semester of technical writing and creative writing. Your next class would be straight American literature, and your 11th grade class would be a world literature class. Your senior class would be a humanities class that is as broad as can be. Like the one I took.

Notice the languages missing? That's right, all of them are gone, and the classes are taught in all the various languages, which I think is pretty nifty. Math in Latin, health in Arabic, Humanities in Russian. Nifty stuff indeed.

Electives would contain all the general electives that are in the high schools already, woods, autos (because mechanics are fucking expensive), computer graphics/CAD, band, orchestra (symphony?). All the stuff you knew and loved when you were in high school. You'll probably get two elective periods depending upon how schools use this kind of curriculum. But I know you will at least get one.

By the way, dropouts will be shot into the blog that's below this (which I need to edit...).

I'm not done thinking about this. Because when you're mind is clear, it's free to wander.