It's not often you find a major cultural event where representatives from the three biggest churches in Sydney fail to turn up, but the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras is one such event. A survey of the grounds at Victoria Park on the 17th of February showed a myriad of tents, with everything from Turkish Gozleme to gay dating, dog shows, and more. Yet, despite this panoply, not a single representative from the Uniting Church (which was unusual, given their lenient attitudes towards homosexuality in the church), the Catholic Church, or the Anglican Church (hardly surprising) was present. These three churches together would comprise about 75-80% of Australia's Christian population.
In fact, the only religious groups that were there were the Quakers, the MCC (Metropolitan Community Church), and some "gay Catholics". The two former bodies, as far as I could discern, were about dogmatic as the Dalai Lama. The Quakers in particular declared that they had dispensed with the Bible as anything other than "an important text" alongside Quaker writings and the writings of other faiths. The MCC similarly took the line that Bible was only a guide, and that the church was open to all regardless of gender identity/sexual orientation. The question that always occurs to me after such meetings is - why bother? I mean, the Bible (unless you take the Secret Gospel of Mark found by Morton Smith to be true) is probably one of the most prejudiced books in existence today. If, in an alternate universe, I happened to churn one out for public consumption, it would probably be banned on the grounds of inciting hatred against sexual minorities (as well as a whole host of other people). Why try and beat out interpretations that are pro-homosexuality, when the book is so clearly, fundamentally opposed to same-sex relations?
The gay Catholics, I thought, were just a tad more dogmatic, if only about the fact that they don't have a dogma. Operating outside the church proper, they met in a Catholic Church on Friday where a priest would provide a mass and the Eucharist, and then "party on", to quote a member. Further questioning on their religious position made me question however their commitment to liberal values. For instance, while they seemed to support the "Sorry" speech by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, when my partner pushed them on the issue of abortion, they quickly froze, referring to the issue as "deeply personal". Again, she pointed out that, as Catholics who "just happened to be gay", they would surely agree with the Pope on the issue of abortion, and indeed, contraceptive use, sex before marriage, etc. All too quickly the shutters were drawn, and we were quickly reminded that just because a person has an alternative lifestyle, that doesn't necessarily mean they're progressive on other issues. Can gay Christians be as bigoted as straight Christians? Absolutely, and I think the likes of these men, as well as the infamous Ted Haggard, prove this to be true.
On a lighter note, the Raelians were present, and as always, were a delightful laugh. Far less insidious then the Scientologists (who, in my opinion, are hands down one of the most evil organisations in existence today), their stall had a UFO model as well as various books by Rael, including my favourite "Sensual Meditation". They also had a pity quote, declaring that intolerance against homosexuals and bisexuals was foolish and misguided, as the issue was purely genetic, and was akin to "hating a cat just because it was a cat, or a chicken because it was a chicken". While I agree with the sentiment, I'm not sure about the metaphor.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
A new speaker...
Is it just me, or does the new speaker of the house of reps look vaguely like Bill Bryson? Or do I just have a Bryson fetish?
Bill Bryson
Bill Bryson
Harry Jenkins (the new speaker)
Sunday, February 10, 2008
The mediocrity of Bah'a'ullah and the paltriness of the Baha'i
Does my anti-religious position really stretch so far as to condemn a faith which has been persecuted since its inception, that lists the equality of the sexes, the unity of humankind, the establishment of an universal auxiliary language, and the harmony of religion and science as some of its major precepts? Yes. For the Baha'i faith, as its zealous and unquestioning followers refer to it, is frankly, not much better than any other dogmatic cult that has the misfortune to spread enmity on the earth.
Indeed, many of the proclamations of the Baha'i are actually incredibly superficial. The equality of the sexes extends only so far as to the supreme decision making body of the Baha'i community, where women are barred from election. This rather obvious discrepancy is dismissed with the rather pathetic excuse that the reason for high-ranking inequality "will be revealed by god in the fullness of time". Moreover, although Bahaullah encouraged his followers to make wills, in the event that they didn't, women get a comparatively poor deal compared to men in the division of any inheritance. Fathers over mothers, brothers over sisters, boys over girls.
The harmony of religion and science, often touted as one of the greatest things about the Baha'i faith, is equally skin-deep. While the Baha'is recognise that science should be allowed to progress, it is science that benefits the Baha'i faith, rather than any science that does not seek to find "the truth". While Shogi Effendi may have declared this was in reference to theological hairsplitting, one wonders what the Baha'is would do if it were found that universe came into existence from a quantum fluctuation - would the Baha'is really still support science? What about evolution, particularly when Bahaullah proclaimed that man has existed since all eternity? No, of course, as usual, the Baha'i's do some rather nice reinterpretation and come up with some claptrap about "the essence of man having always existed through mutations". Props to them Abdul Baha for coming up with it so early though.
However, I think what really gets to me about the Baha'is is how obviously, painfully, fascist they really are. I've finished reading the Kitab i-aqdas (the most holy book in the Baha'i faith, it's pretty short), and it's essentially like reading Leviticus and Deuteronomy, or the more boring parts of the Qur'an. Notes upon notes, minutiae upon minutiae, ridiculous laws and patterns of how they must be performed. Every aspect of life, from dawn till dusk, maturity (15) till death, is regulated by these "infallible" scriptures. The same infallible scriptures that still preach that homosexuality is wrong, and can be overcome through the help of doctors and prayer. And just in case you're worried about using a watch, it's ok! Bahaullah (god) makes sure you know that clocks are fine to use.
The Baha'i model is at its very core, utopian, idealistic, and dangerously, dangerously fascistic. With infallible leaders, scriptures, and elected elders, it differs little from the communist parties in many countries across the world (and I say this as an ex-communist). Its concept of divine manifestation, and immutable laws that will last a thousand years is all too similar to the "thousand year Reich" of Adolf Hitler. And with execution, exile, and excommunication as tools in the Baha'i apparatus of control, this supposedly tolerant faith seems as though it might go the way of Jim Jones' Peoples' Temple.
Indeed, many of the proclamations of the Baha'i are actually incredibly superficial. The equality of the sexes extends only so far as to the supreme decision making body of the Baha'i community, where women are barred from election. This rather obvious discrepancy is dismissed with the rather pathetic excuse that the reason for high-ranking inequality "will be revealed by god in the fullness of time". Moreover, although Bahaullah encouraged his followers to make wills, in the event that they didn't, women get a comparatively poor deal compared to men in the division of any inheritance. Fathers over mothers, brothers over sisters, boys over girls.
The harmony of religion and science, often touted as one of the greatest things about the Baha'i faith, is equally skin-deep. While the Baha'is recognise that science should be allowed to progress, it is science that benefits the Baha'i faith, rather than any science that does not seek to find "the truth". While Shogi Effendi may have declared this was in reference to theological hairsplitting, one wonders what the Baha'is would do if it were found that universe came into existence from a quantum fluctuation - would the Baha'is really still support science? What about evolution, particularly when Bahaullah proclaimed that man has existed since all eternity? No, of course, as usual, the Baha'i's do some rather nice reinterpretation and come up with some claptrap about "the essence of man having always existed through mutations". Props to them Abdul Baha for coming up with it so early though.
However, I think what really gets to me about the Baha'is is how obviously, painfully, fascist they really are. I've finished reading the Kitab i-aqdas (the most holy book in the Baha'i faith, it's pretty short), and it's essentially like reading Leviticus and Deuteronomy, or the more boring parts of the Qur'an. Notes upon notes, minutiae upon minutiae, ridiculous laws and patterns of how they must be performed. Every aspect of life, from dawn till dusk, maturity (15) till death, is regulated by these "infallible" scriptures. The same infallible scriptures that still preach that homosexuality is wrong, and can be overcome through the help of doctors and prayer. And just in case you're worried about using a watch, it's ok! Bahaullah (god) makes sure you know that clocks are fine to use.
The Baha'i model is at its very core, utopian, idealistic, and dangerously, dangerously fascistic. With infallible leaders, scriptures, and elected elders, it differs little from the communist parties in many countries across the world (and I say this as an ex-communist). Its concept of divine manifestation, and immutable laws that will last a thousand years is all too similar to the "thousand year Reich" of Adolf Hitler. And with execution, exile, and excommunication as tools in the Baha'i apparatus of control, this supposedly tolerant faith seems as though it might go the way of Jim Jones' Peoples' Temple.
In principio...
Howdy all. Having blogged as an atheist on Facebook for the past year or so, I thought it was about time I got off my virtual armchair, and delved into the real blogosphere. I know there are a thousand and one atheist/agnostic/skeptical blogs out there, but you know, the more the merrier. I hope believer and non-believer alike will enjoy, and above all, spark some healthy debate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
