Deism -not such a giant leap of faith!

I have lost count of the number of times that I have heard that America was created by the Founding Fathers as a Christian Nation. This assertion is quite untrue. I have recently been doing some research on the subject, the results of which have been very revealing. Washington, Jefferson, Locke, Adams, Paine and Franklin were surprisingly ambivalent on religion and indeed most held Deist views. In fact Thomas Paine penned the seminal Deist book “Age of Reason” which was an eloquent tirade against organized religion, particularly Christianity. Deism became more prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries during the Age of Enlightenment both in Europe and America among thinking people who had been raised as Christians. They believed in one God but found fault with the so called “revealed religion”. In particular they could not accept its beliefs in supernatural events such as the New Testament miracles, the notion of a Trinity or the Resurrection.

Deism is based solely on reason, personal, experience and the observation of nature.The main contention stresses the difference between “revealed” or “reasoned” beliefs. As Thomas Paine said; revelation is solely a onetime event. No biblical writings were by people who were actually there. Subsequent to this he states -“there is only hearsay”. He went on to say:

“I believe in one God and no more; and hope for happiness beyond this life.

I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. 

My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”

Below as a printed example of the foregoing, I paste Article 11 of the treaty of Tripoli which was signed by President John Adams and unanimously ratified by the Senate in May 1797 

  
Deism, which is currently enjoying something of a resurgence, is the purest, most honest and simplest of all belief systems, requiring nothing more than a God who they assert, having first calculated the appropriate equations, fired up the creation programme and then sat back to observe the results. At the time of the Founding Fathers there were no evolutionary considerations as this predated Darwin’s “Origin of Species” by about 60 years. There were no Big Bang concerns either, so there was no muddying of the theological waters. Simply accepting that God was the original Creator they argued, was all that is necessary and attempts to introduce intermediate stages between God and the people are invalid. All so called “revealed” religions with their convoluted complications and restrictions are the manifestations of either the power hungry, control freaks or those who make a living from it.           

Some traditional deists believed that God, whilst no longer active in creation did not abandon it but merely watched to observe. However, most modern deists believe that God is most likely to have made some course corrections or carried out some fine-tuning. With the arrival of evolutionary thought, some feel that the emergence of homo sapiens required something more than merely holding a watching brief. This was due to the intangible -some may call it spiritual properties of the new species.

The most difficult to understand features of physical evolution are now understood –even the eye (-or so I am told). However amongst all living creatures, mankind possesses a number of quite distinct and unique properties. The most obvious is conscience, and it possesses what might be described as an instinctive morality which embraces the concept of good and bad, right and wrong. Although born with it, for a variety of reasons, many choose to compromise or even ignore this. 
Perhaps even more remarkable is our ability to create and appreciate music, literature, sculpture, painting etc. However, for me the most puzzling -unless our evolution followed the same branch as kookaburras or hyenas, is laughter. From what or how does a sense of humour evolve? 

Also to consider is the precise positioning of the earth relative to the sun and its 23.4 deg. tilt to give the seasons. Which came first, the evolution of plants to match the above or was the earth tilted to match the sun to the plants?   Do we really need to know? Deists take all of this in their stride. Believers are simply encouraged to give some thought to life’s mysteries but not to obsess over it.

The same thing applies to life after death. They will find out in due course as to its veracity. If it’s not true then they won’t know or care one bit. God has given everyone a magnificent mind to think with and would expect that it is used to its fullest capacity, not regrettably, like many of religious persuasions who expect someone else to do their thinking for them. Deists argue that you deal directly with the top man, the President and CEO. He is unlikely to defer anyone in the direction of the self-appointed sectarian subordinates -all complete with their specific and stifling agendas. Provided that you’ve made your best and honest effort with life, that would be considered quite sufficient.

After having recently read a number of publications –including Paine’s “The Age of Reason”,  I am amazed at how the plethora of so called “revealed religions” still prevails -complete with their seemingly endless and contradictory sects, ostentatious structures, paraphernalia, trinkets, fancy dress and funny hats. Above all is the shameless exploitation of primitive fear, superstition, coercion, the supernatural and finally threats of divine retribution, followed by eternal damnation (-by this God of unconditional love!) for those who fail to make the final cut. This monstrous proposition has for long oppressed and terrified much of the world’s population. For those prepared to make the transition there is no further need for sycophantic grovelling on bended knees, chanting, begging and telling God how great he is. He will already be well aware of the fact! Deism would effectively render the ecclesiastical baggage and self centred control wielders of all monotheistic belief structures redundant.

My recent exposure to Deism has been nothing short of an epiphany into an environment where common sense prevails, with all unnecessary theological knots untangled, a transition into an world of sunlit simplicity; a breath of fresh air; an expanse of cool clear water –or any other suitable clichés to comprise -as its adherents would have it; a reasoned, nature-based assessment!          

To conclude, the address below from the Modern Deist website outlines its principles and offers up a sensible list of 12 modern “Commandments” http://moderndeism.com/html/deist_principles.html These make infinitely more sense than the antiquated original with its oxen, asses, graven images etc., However, despite the dictates of the original second commandment, no doubt the latter will continue to be well represented by the many stone facsimiles which exist in and around  places of worship!

What Kept You?

                       My old scoutmaster, who was also the local Rector of our parish, despite being a bit of an irascible old tarter, held some fairly progressive views on the subject of human history and specifically evolution. Far from the creationists beliefs that the world had been magically kick-started into existence a mere 6000 years ago, he was a supporter of Charles Darwin. Seeing a perplexing disconnect between evolution and the story of Adam and Eve, I plucked up enough courage to ask for an explanation. His response was immediate and unequivocal. Genesis was not tied to a specific historical date, but was a creation myth meant to represent the period within evolution when Man (and Woman) first became aware of the difference between right and wrong and possessed the conscious ability to make moral choices. I was quite impressed!

            According to a wealth of historic scientific data, Man is considered to have reached his current evolutionary state several hundreds of thousands of years ago.  Indeed Louis Leakey and his successors have found anatomical remains of humanoid fossils in Kenya from well over a million years ago.

            Religious scholars tell us that the development and institutionalisation of most of the world’s religions took place during the “Axial Period”. This extended from about 800BC to about 200AD. In the case of Judaism there is no precise date. Its origins could go back as far as 6000 years. The current year of the Jewish calendar is 5773. On the other extreme, Islam did not appear until approximately 600 AD. Overall however, 6000 years seems to bracket the development of the “ground rules” associated with the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths.  

            However, thinking this through presents a total enigma. The problem is in reconciling the Axial Period dates with those associated with the evolution of contemporary human beings. Even taking worst case scenarios, we have two dates where we are comparing the origin of religions 6000 years ago against at least 100000 years of human existence. In other words despite all manner of savagery, intertribal slaying, smiting, hacking and hewing taking place over the intervening millennia, religious followers seem happy to accept the fact that their deity of choice  looked on for at least 94000 years and did nothing! Why? Even then, in the case of the Abrahamic religions, an obscure  region at the eastern end of the Mediterranean inhabited by primitive and warring desert tribes was chosen as its seed area. One might have thought that in order to get the process off to a flying start, God might have looked further to the East where philosophy and civilization was somewhat more developed.

            Of course this fits nicely with the beliefs of the creationists who believe only in “instant” creation 6000 years ago -contrary to all of the geological, archeological and biological evidence gathered over the years. Even worse, they seem quite happy to reject all of the capabilities of their God-given powers of thought and reasoning.  

             

The Sweet Hereafter

      The notion of life after death is pivotal to the belief structures of most religions. To them, without it the purpose of life is difficult to comprehend. Millions lead their lives in the expectation that having shrugged off their respective mortal coils they will be magically transformed to a magical place called Heaven. For the majority, this ultimate venue is seen as a reward for having lived their lives in obedience to the tenets of their chosen faith (or more likely one that was chosen for them!) where they will once again meet up with their “pre-deceasers”. Then, happily once more rejoined with previously departed family and friends -and with what had been their terminal pre-death circumstances fully eliminated they will party on in a state of bliss for eternity. On the other extreme, the destination of those who didn’t make the celestial cut will be the fire and brimstone tortures of Hell. This little scenario over the ages has been utilized to control and subjugate the sinful, intransigent masses. Better education and scientific evidence has made the above an increasingly unlikely explanation and an increasingly poor refuge for those who are determined to stick with it.
      Those who take the trouble and have the fortitude to think the process through will find the concept difficult to embrace. Should there be an afterlife, what form does it take and where is it located? Certainly it is not within the astronomic range of current telescope technology. The Hubble instrument is able to probe millions of light years back in time towards the very origins of our universe and as far as locating any possible heavenly location has drawn a complete blank. It has been suggested that there is a parallel universe or alternatively another dimension outside the scope of our mortal purview which will explain everything -if we only understood what it means!
      Anyway, let’s follow an example through. Human relationships are physical as well as spiritual. A husband/wife relationship (the successful ones!) contains a strong spiritual component (or should do) but there is also a strong physical element too. Te wife sees in her husband a collection of characteristics which she has come to strongly associate with him, many of which are physical. Even knobbly knees, beer belly, balding head a distinctive walk; his good and bad habits all form an amalgam of characteristics which collectively constitute “him”. Similarly the husband will retain an image in his mind as to what originally attracted him in the first place, much of which would have been physical. All her physical and sexual components would have played a significant part in addition to her personality characteristics. As time goes by, less tangible characteristics will replace the physical component by a spiritual element of the relationship and will hopefully enhance it. What then would be the form of the loved one in the afterlife? Would it be as it was when they were in their physical prime? It surely could not be immediately prior to death. That could be most painful to say the least.
      However, the point of all the foregoing is that in our terrestrially-based thinking, such a spiritual manifestation cannot be without at least some of the physical form since that, throughout life it has been an integral part of what defined the individual. With this scenario it is extremely difficult to envisage how it could ever work. How would my mother appear to me? As she did when I was 5 or 45, the latter being my age at her demise? Would she appear as she was when they were married and physically in her prime (-five years before I was born); or in her depleted state before she died. How would she appear to my father? Would she be as when they were married or just before she died at 75? How would my father appear to her? When they were married or prior to his death as a frail old man of 91? Could she appear differently to us both?
      Since throughout mortal life physical phenomena played such an integral part, the fully mature post-life spiritual identity must include some acknowledgement of it. As an crude example, the notion of Whitney Houston as purely spiritual would lose all of what constituted her vocal achievements and physical attributes!
      For this reason I find great difficulty in grasping the fundamentals of how the afterlife would work. I cannot envisage how the complete separation of the spiritual from the physical could be satisfactory from any aspect. The notion that we all float around merely as ectoplasm or spiritual entities (whatever that means) seems preposterous. Whatever spirit form is taken, to be identifiable to others in the same predicament, it would need some form of a recognizable I.D. or be a facsimile of an erstwhile flesh and bones person as they were at some point in their life and certainly before the onset of terminal decay. In particular consider the harrowing last stages of an Alzheimer’s sufferer.
      Because of these considerations it is difficult if not impossible to accept the terrestrial concept of the hereafter with the simplistic wisdom of the dear departed “looking down” (-looking up in the southern hemisphere!). In the distressing case of the departed being a child who now has become “one of God’s angels” another terrestrial intrusion occurs. The mere concept of angels implies an atmosphere; otherwise their wings would be superfluous. Even hellfire assumes the presence of oxygen to support the conflagration. To perpetuate such notions can be of little consolation to anyone taking the time to think it through. Without some form of physical prompt, how is one to know who or what are we dealing with. If we are unable to “see” or “feel” what senses would we use for identification and communication,
      Maybe some of the ancients were right after all and that paradise is simply heaven on earth! This would perhaps be a fine thing if all its positive features remained and all the negatives were eradicated. However, with all humanity milling around since the dawn of time, space would become a consideration. More likely is to be something much more profound, possibly involving some form of “collective consciousness” containing the quintessential essence, not only of the departed individual, but all of those who have gone before. Could we develop some form of all-embracing “spiritual awareness” which would transcend our earthbound senses? Once again, we find comprehension of anything outside our earthly lot difficult to imagine. Particle Physics, Quantum Mechanics and the general acceptance that the cosmos, far from being a vacuum, is a seething mass of electromagnetic waves or particles, variously referred to by such nomenclature as “The Field” or “The Matrix” leads us to believe that we are all connected. As I previously suggested, we could all be part of a shared consciousness.               

      Furthermore it might be that for their allotted life span, every person is provided with a particle of Matrix to which they impart their individual characteristics and behavior based upon a similar sounding word –conscience. At their demise, this portion (their soul?) is then returned to the Matrix for assessment, retention or recycling into a new physical body. As to how or by what criterion this grading would be made I have no idea. Finally, one wonders what activities the departed would engage in for eternity. Away from the earth and its operating envelope, there would be no circadian rhythms, no day or night or seasons. Just a continuous, eternal awareness, stretching into infinity. Assuming that such phenomena as tedium or boredom are not applicable in the celestial realms, what the heck would we do all this time?  

      Because of all the foregoing, whilst keeping an open mind, the existence of the popular concept of the sweet hereafter seems highly improbable. If it does exist, I am sure that it will be a far cry from the simplistic and wildly unlikely notions that we will all be at heavenly peace in the arms of Jesus -along with the 30+billion other existing residents. With the religious doctrines losing credibility, to persist in these fanciful notions, a better educated and informed populace will progressively be alienated from their particular belief fantasy. However, the residue of early mind indoctrination and superstition might still remain -despite the amount of evidence to the contrary, and result in a superstitious “what if” concern that they just can’t shake. 

      Although the actual process of dying is understandably something to dread; having completed the process many seem to be afraid of death and overly concerned about a possible hereafter? They were not alive in 1800 and didn’t miss it. Why worry that they won’t be alive in 2100? In the event that there is no afterlife, this is the worst scenario. The oblivion prior to their birth will simply resume. Come to think of it, most people were oblivious of 4am last night and glad of it!



.

The Status Quo; a sombre assessment.

           Now firmly established in the new millennium, it might be appropriate to conduct some form of global audit to reflect on where we are and how the past one hundred years or so has shaped our present predicament. This has been a period during which more has happened in all areas of activity than in all of recorded history. In the Western world in particular, progressive thinking and advances in political and social structure of many countries, has bestowed undreamed of improvement in personal freedom and quality of life. The efforts of many visionaries and revolutionaries in many countries have resulted in a much more equitable distribution of wealth and benefits. In the more democratic countries, income levels have increased enormously. Indeed, until quite recently the concept of disposable income was something known only to the privileged few, the vast majority having to be content with maintaining themselves solely at hand to mouth subsistence levels.

            With the widespread collapse of the Communist system, there was even reason to hope that the benefits currently enjoyed by the western countries would progressively be extended to a larger number of countries around the globe. The technological revolution has been even more explosive, and is completely transforming the way we live as well as our relationship with each other and the environments in which we live. Initiated by the harnessing of electricity and with it the enhancement of creature comforts, the vast increase in mobility brought about by developments in mass transportation and more recently the colossal impact of computer driven communication and information for all are astounding.

            With this array of material benefits available to so many, it might be supposed that mankind has finally come of age and that over time with these multifaceted improvements available on a global basis. we will have finally arrived in the fabled land of milk and honey.  Within this earthly nirvana, it might well be supposed that there is no longer any need to concern ourselves with other than material matters.  Already, many of the ancient religious beliefs have come under critical scrutiny. Many previously held “truths” have been shown to be misconceptions. Science has explained away much of what had been believed to be directly controlled by divine intervention. In particular, medical sciences have transformed and in many cases saved the lives many for whom a terminal prognosis had been the case. Allowing the blind to see, the deaf to hear and the lame to walk as well as many distressing physical and mental infirmities, are a few of their cornucopia  of successes. In some cases, some of the worst of afflictions such as polio and smallpox have been virtually eradicated.

            From a history of hardships at subsistence level, mankind now has the time to reflect on life in a new way and hopefully to adopt a more altruistic attitude to those still condemned to lives of penury and suffering. Were this to be true, the world would certainly be at least a more compassionate place where selflessness and concern for mankind at least for those for whom financial security -if not affluence, has become an accepted part of their lifestyle. However, whilst these worthy objectives are practiced amongst naturally caring individuals, sadly for the most part, closer examination reveals that a great number of us live their lives in contrast to the benevolence of the minority.

            Overall, what impact has this brave new world impacted on how we feel about ourselves, our interaction with each other and our relationship with the earth; the very core of our existence. Over humanity in general, a listing of the outcome reads less like an enhancement of the human experience and more like a litany of symptoms and sicknesses including  words which 100 years ago were unknown.

1. Personal:

Stress

Anxiety

Depression

Suicide

Addictions

Eating disorders

Cancer

Heart disease

 2. Societal:

Failed relationships

Divorce

Spousal abuse

Abuses against children

Cyber bullying

Violence

Cynicism

Apathy

Indifference

Pornography

 Greed

 Corruption

Corporate avarice

3. Environmental:

Global warming

Air pollution

Ozone depletion

Toxic waste

Acid rain

Clear cutting

Depletion of flora and fauna

Depletion of non-renewable resources

            What a devastating indictment of the modern world! Is this the cumulative result of thousands of years of “civilization”? More remarkable is the likelihood that none of the above will come as news to anyone. It seems that we have firmly embarked on a course which will lead us progressively down an alliterative descent of despair, despondency, depression and finally, death. What is worse, there is no sign of any turn round without which the prognosis for future generations gives cause for serious concern. Even if and when this is accepted and there is the will to halt the decline, with the best will in the world, the situation will take considerable time to reverse.

Much of the above dismal list has been aided by some of the  technical contributions to the modern age. Some notable innovations, things that should be of a positive nature such as communications technology -which includes popular entertainment and social media have in many cases been distorted. Responsible for the “dumbing down” of substance into style, distorters of facts into fiction, spinners of political agendas, and shapers of public taste (or lack thereof), the chief offenders are beholden to and faithful servants of the giant corporations without whom they would cease to exist.

Therefore it seems high time to stand back, take a deep breath, and with a clear mind, look at the big picture. It is vital to take objective stock of the status quo and to review, re-examine and question many of the long accepted fundamentals of “civilized” conduct and belief structure.

 For some this will be difficult. For example, it targets the mindless acceptance of primitive and arcane dogmatic superstition which for many has for too long been accepted without question. It demands the disposal of all unnecessary philosophical baggage to clear the mind and by sensible and logical reasoning get a more rational feel for what life is, free of any inherited predigested crutches, chemical dependency or cosmetic cop-outs.

Perhaps the best place to begin is with our relationship with the extraordinary and beautiful world around us. This is our home and the essence of everything we experience. Earth, air, fire and water is all there is, from which our bodies emerge and to which they will ultimately return. Sadly, our increasingly urban-based societies are moving progressively towards a man-made environment. Instead of embracing the world and its wonders, the trend is towards insulating ourselves from it.

I have an image in my mind of a stereotypical young urban person on the street, smart phone in hand or headphone in ear, their companions all similarly immersed in their own cyber world. Their mountains and landscapes are of steel, glass, and concrete, the rivers flowing between them made of tarmac. For them, stillness and tranquillity paradoxically seem to cause disquiet and anxiety and any silence has to be blotted out electronically either by texting, conversation or music of varying mediocrity. Indeed the presence of the latter is all-pervading and virtually impossible to escape. 

Many are given to question the purpose of their existence and find themselves in a spiritual vacuum from where they desperately attempt to submerge their neuroses in the pursuit of material possessions and corporeal stimulation. In my experience, those who have been brought up to experience the wilderness or at least unspoiled natural environments at an early age quickly develop a love of the outdoors. Moreover, looking back over the many years during which I have engaged with nature in a variety of pursuits including hiking, paddling, camping and cycle-touring, by far the  majority of those whom I have met and shared these experiences have been (-suitably in the circumstances) firmly grounded and almost without exception to be people of good will.          

2012 Tweed riding -Toronto Style!

          My daughter and I recently participated in the 2012 Toronto Tweed Ride. Clad in garments which reflected at least in part the material implicit in the title and riding 1970’s “Raleigh Sports” 3-speed bicycles, with some trepidation and in the company of 300 others,we launched ourselves into the maelstrom of Saturday afternoon urban Toronto. Here we negotiated high density motorized traffic, pedestrians and above all the street cars of Queen Steet, their deadly tracks ready to trap the unwary. Presumably aided by our strength in numbers there were no problems. Indeed my most enduring memory is of the extraordinary good nature of everyone -including motorists who were often held up at intersections, traffic lights etc. Many pedestrians expressed themselves in a very vocal and positive manner throughout. At the group photo on the steps of Old City Hall our arrival coincided with the exit of a newly married couple to find that they had 300 more well wishers than they expected!

          Later in the ride afternoon tea was served in one of the local parks which in addition to freshly brewed tea included an unusually fine selection of cakes and assorted baked goods. It was a most enjoyable event which raised a substantial sum for “Bikes without Borders”, a charity which specializes in providing life-transforming bicycles to rural Africa and other needy regions across the globe.

          In general the theme of these burgeoning worldwide Tweed Rides is (very) broadly to emulate the era of the twentieth century when the bicycle was ubiquitous among the British working class. I am old enough to remember the latter part of those days and indeed was part of it. Tweed rides display a curious disconnect between then and now. The heights of sartorial elegance on global display are a very far cry from the workingman's modest and often threadbare wardrobe. In my youth those able to afford such tweedy excesses would have been more likely to drive a Bentley or maybe “-ride to hounds” and most unlikely to be seen on any bicycle. “Heaven forefend old boy. What a frightful thought!” The class system was alive and well!

          The preeminent bicycling guru, the late-lamented Sheldon Brown, summed it up as follows:-

"For many years, in many parts of the world, the Raleigh "Sports" three-speed bicycle was considered the ultimate in human-powered transportation. These bicycles were not toys, and, despite the model name, they were not sporting equipment...they were serious vehicles. The men and women who built them, by and large, also rode them, as their primary means of transportation...  ...these were designed to provide solid, dependable transportation for the British public, at a time when only the upper classes had motorcars. These bikes were built to last 100 years, with reasonable care."

 Our two Raleigh "Sports"

   

     Despite the cultural anomaly, Tweed rides, in addition to providing healthy recreation to the participants, have become a new expression of charitable activity. They are environmentally benign and by virtue of their high visibility, extremely effective in raising public awareness. Finally, from our experience, the non-competitive social aspect of these gatherings would seem to generate an infectious atmosphere of camaraderie and good nature, which is not confined to the actual participants.   

     Here are a couple of videos of the event. Sadly, but perhaps appropriately in the light of my comments above they concentrate more on the fashions than the bicycles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRX7o1tJD30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQWGL-6nkgU

Survival of the Richest!

           The US convention season is with us again and once again I shake my head at its format. It seems that in order to attract viewership it is necessary to dumb everything down to the level of extreme pizzazz and show biz superficiality. As is everything else in America, money -lots of it, seems to be the main criteria, without which there is no chance of success. The acquisition of this commodity –lots of it is, under the present system the prime requirement for aspiring Presidents. Both major parties receive major support from large corporations and in so doing surrender themselves up to their mercies. It even seems acceptable for corporate backers to sponsor both sides to hedge their bets. The expression “Bulging Coffers” has been used to define the party’s financial situation. Why should this be such a pivotal factor? On an individual level, how does Mitt Romney’s personal acquisition of wealth (-greed?) inspire a nation or indeed be considered to be an attribute of good leadership? On the contrary, it could be argued that those who have spent their lives compiling fortunes are more likely to be self serving and more interested in “turning a buck” than on providing good governance. Moreover, such “successful” individuals might find it difficult empathize with those less fortunate. Looking back into recent global history it seems that the most inspiring leaders have by comparison been devoid of wealth or any inclination or the wherewithal to acquire it. Gandhi, Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi prevailed but only after surviving adversity and perilous circumstances.

            The current Republic convention, occurring during storm “Isaac” has solicited minimal acknowledgement of this catastrophe (-to my ears anyway). Not to be outdone, President Obama continues to conduct electoral business in Virginia. As of writing, neither contestant has yet made a significant effort to tour the afflicted areas, many of which are home to the less privileged demographic, to offer personal sympathy and support. Some leadership!.

            TV news reports have sandwiched harrowing accounts from distraught victims in the storm centre between updates from the Convention Hall, the latter filled with sleek, well-nourished, grinning, self-congratulatory delegates, high-fiving, bouncing up and down like clapping jack-in-the-boxes at each pithy one-liner emanating from the podium. I find the stark contrast between these extremes most disturbing..

           And then, just when it seemed that things would conclude in their predictable fashion, old Clint came moseying down the aisle -and with a rambling, barely-coherent unscripted presentation with less than pithy one-liners, virtually high jacked the proceedings. Someone attempted to excuse him on the grounds that he is merely a fiscal and not a full blooded social conservative –duh! Could he also possibly be -dare I say  it –an Atheist?

            Next we have the Democratic Convention to look forward to with no doubt much of the same fare. How or for what reason did it all evolve into to this ridiculous “Dog and Pony” show? With apologies to the Creationists I don’t think that even Darwin could have possibly predicted it.  

Sacred Geometry

       This is one of the most brilliant and revealing videos I have ever seen. It’s rather long but you can leave the final 25 min for later. This latter portion just consists of multicoloured graphics which extend the content of the preceding 1 hour. Whatever you do don’t miss the period from 28 min. to 1: 06 min. This fully explains the origin of the “Golden Ratio” and Fibonacci series and how it is integrated into every part of our reality from micro to macro -from DNA to the Cosmos. It consists of astonishing and easy to understand animated graphics. It has to be easy or I wouldn’t have understood it :)  There is no dialogue. 

       It should be shown in schools, as being entirely derived from mathematics it is a fundamental unarguable truth. The religious zealots cannot take issue with any of it. Many thinkers have said that the origin of the Universe and the elusive " Theory of Everything" is merely mathematics that we don't yet comprehend.  It's a very persuasive argumenrt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGqKdqfEYp4&feature=player_embedded

Sexual Ambivalence

      I find it quite extraordinary that here in 2012, there are still those who refuse to accept that homosexuals are, as as the song says “Born This Way”. Were this not the case then what would be the point in “coming out”. Surely it would be preferable to keep the closet door closed and avoid unnecessary marginalization of themselves to friends, families and associates. The Catholic church in Canada is currently even finding the usage of the word "gay" or "gay/strait alliance" unacceptable. Such intolerant semantic nonsense is a bit rich coming from an organisation with such an appalling record of sexual misconduct by its so called God's representatives on earth. In an even more extreme example, according to the evangelistic ignorati of Southern US, they will be destined to ”Buyurn iyn Hayell”!!
      The suggestion that homosexuality is a temptation against which all should safeguard themselves is perfectly absurd.. For the vast majority of heterosexuals, particularly males, the mere thought of same sex intimacy which includes anal sex, is quite abhorrent. The question of  "temptation" with respect to the healthily sexually normal rank and file is essentially a non-issue and invalid.
      Notwithstanding the foregoing, there is perhaps a contrary argument to be made in one specific case involving females who have frequently suffered from the actions of abusive husbands or partners. In these unfortunate circumstances, is it not likely that those so mistreated could possibly seek a relationship with other lonely women who have trodden a similar unhappy path to themselves in an effort to achieve some measure of security, happiness and even physical intimacy? Is this sinful too?
      It is a remarkably unperceptive person who cannot discern human anomalies that can exist both in appearance as well as spoken and body language. For example, the notion of of a mincing male designer of haute couture having anything in common either physically or emotionally with all-in wrestling is absurd. Similarly a robust female coach of a hockey team is rather unlikely to be interested in needlepoint and lace making. Not surprisingly the foregoing and other similar instances are frequently associated with tendencies towards homosexuality. The only question to be answered is whether there is an overlap between the overall range of male and female traits. Should this be the case, then surely ambiguity is to be expected together with a understandable sexual preference for the same gender.
      Using Coreldraw, I have cobbled together below a somewhat crude example of what I mean graphically. It takes the form of arbitrarily positioned circles representing male or female psyche traits respectively with an overlapping hatched “area of ambiguity” together with an equally arbitrary line of demarcation. Using the previous examples it would seem self evident that the sexual traits of the male designer would position him towards the right side of the "Man" traits circle and similarly the female hockey coach would be inclined towards the left of that of the "Woman". They may or may not cross the line of demarcation. Furthermore, however inconvenient it might be to the judgmental, in extreme cases there are transsexual people who possess physical sexual characteristics of both genders. What are they to do? It is not uncommon among these unfortunates that to enhance their quality of life, they resort to medical procedures -including surgery to bestow a physical configuration more in accord with their sense of emotional identity and peace of mind. Is this also a sin?

      As time goes on, due to the relaxation of societal acceptability, the traditional behavioural differences between the sexes is declining. In the case of modern females, now no longer required to behave in a “ladylike” manner, participation in such activities as boxing or other extreme sports is not uncommon. By the same token, male nurses or primary school teachers are becoming progressively mainstream. These activities are by no means indicative of sexual ambivalence but reveal that without artificial societal constraints placed upon them, the differences are perhaps less than previously thought.

      In conclusion, I would briefly address the assertions of religious zealots that homosexuality is against Biblical teaching. Within its pages it is possible to find reference or justification both for and against virtually any belief. Starting at the beginning, it is only necessary to reach Chapter 19 of Genesis; to read how Lot’s daughters got their father drunk, had sex with him and became pregnant. Verse 36 nicely encapsulates the story “Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father”. Even earlier, in Chapter 4, Verse 17, we are told that "Cain knew his wife". As the son of Adam and Eve, who did he marry? It must have been his sister. Does this mean that whilst homosexuality is taboo, incest is acceptable?

Proselytizers in the 'hood

              Our neighborhood seems to receive more than its share of visits from members of those bringing the “good news”. Last year, during one four week period we received 3 teams of emissaries, two from Jehovah’s Witnesses and the other from the Mormon Church. Indeed the sight of two or three representatives, usually clad like undertakers in dark suits and carrying briefcases prowling the neighborhood is a fairly common sight. 

               Whereas most residents seem to briefly indulge their sales pitch from behind the security of a partly opened door, prior to accepting their “Watchtower” (or equivalent); others give them short shrift and close the door with a terse “not interested". I have adopted a somewhat different response. Since they have seen fit to invade my privacy unbidden, I have now decided to try and take them on. I employ a pre-emptive move before they have time to get into their sales pitch and ask them a couple of (to my mind) quite legitimate questions.

               I inquire if they have considered that their chosen brand of religion is most probably the result of an accident of birth, since had they been born in Israel they would have been Jewish; in Italy, Roman Catholic; in India, Hindu or Buddhist; or in Saudi Arabia, Muslim. Radical changes from one belief to another, whilst not unknown -are extremely rare. I then continue by suggesting that their belief structure has not been acquired as a result of carefully considered thought leading to religious conviction, but from a process of mind conditioning throughout their formative years. They were instructed in what to believe without question, either by their parents and/or some controlling ecclesiastic. This would have stressed that should they fall short of meeting the right level of piety and rectitude they will be ultimately be subjected to the severest divine retribution. In other words they have been scared into it and for reasons of fear and superstition overlaid with a dash of guilt, they willingly toe the denominational line -blind faith!

               Their predictable blustering response is to proclaim that their convictions were indeed acquired as a result of carefully considered thought and introspection. This then opens the door for another question which is to enquire where and in what respects the unsuccessful competitors for devotional commitment have fallen short. Should not Islam be more likely since it evolved later than the others in an age of relative modernity? After all they are “People of the Book” with the same God and some overlap with Judaism and Christianity. What about Buddhism? Being more of a philosophy than a religion there is less of the supernatural esoteric to accept. In any event, all the contestants more or less embrace a “Golden Rule" concept in which we are all counselled to “do as you would be done by”, and it is only after the power and control freaks become involved that the problems start.
             On the latest visit, having completed some superficial research of their history and founders, I opened my account by inquiring whether Joe Smith sent them or were they Charlie Russell’s boys. This unexpected and somewhat crass query certainly seemed unsettle them even more than my two initial questions. At the end I asked why it is that we receive so many visits. After all our area consists mainly of reasonably affluent, law abiding (-to them, God fearing) citizens. In other words we represent safe and easy territory. Might not their ministrations be more appropriate in less fortunate areas where crime, violence and general mayhem is more common?  The effect of this plus my two questions caused them to abandon me as a lost cause, beating  a hasty retreat to next door.
             In future I am thinking of suggesting that Jesus’ parable of the talents in Matthew 25, where the recipient of just one talent buries it in the ground, could well be seen as a metaphor for their belief code. They have neglected to use their one talent of a magnificent, God-given reasoning brain and have effectively buried it whilst looking to others to do their thinking for them.

           Finally, I accept that despite their questionable doctrine they are sincerely trying to do good works. They would probably receive a less hostile or negative reception if they tried to look less funereal and wore informal clothing to better relate to those whose homes they are targeting. In any event I strongly feel that rather than just blandly accepting their predigested theological pablum, they should be questioned.  

The Crocus Tree

We live about 1km from Lake Ontario. Every year at about this time we enjoy a remarkable floral display around an oak tree close to the lake shore.

 

I have made a short three minute video, mainly for friends and relatives in Britain. It shows a little of the general area and the crocus  phenomenon in particular. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDgVMMCJ0Ow&feature=g-upl&context=G2bda33eAUAAAAAAAAAA

Dawes Kingpin re-visited

Last January (2011), I put up the video below which described the conversion of a shopper bike into a fast "hot rod".
http://marctoo.blogspot.com/2011/01/dawes-kingpin-shopper-bike-cycle-re.html
The bike has just been refurbished and reconfigured as a comfortable day tourer. I am very pleased with how it has turned out and how nice it is to ride. I particular I hope to use in its new role when I am on my summer camping excursions. 

                    

Here is a YouTube video giving details of the conversion:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxX1d_xL5Lg&feature=g-upl&context=G2bda33eAUAAAAAAAAAA

Consistent Inconsistencies!

            Even in this enlightened(?) age their remains an almost frenetic sense of propriety to safeguard society from unseemly images or strong language, exposure to which would no doubt irrecoverably corrupt those exposed to it. I initially referred to this phenomenon in my March 8^th 2011 blog “Bizarre Sense of Priorities”. Whilst it might be justified in the more extreme examples, I wonder what it is that the moral gatekeepers are hoping to achieve. For those charged with this awesome responsibility, as an absolute minimum it should be expected that at least there should be some consistency in deciding that which is acceptable from that which is not.

            For example, the use of the word for liquid excrement has become acceptable whereas the word for the solid variety has not. Thus one can be “pissed off” with impunity but cannot describe their day as s—ty or this subject as complete bulls—t. I add the hyphens to appease the blogging Gestapo and to do my share in protecting any unsuspecting readers from possible moral turpitude. Similarly the word “bitch” is quite in order to define the gender of a dog, but unacceptable when used pejoratively as an assessment of a woman’s character –at least sometimes, but not always. There are also a growing number of words involving so called “political correctness” This is intended to convey the full meaning without actually mouthing or writing the complete words of normal language and offending the sensibilities. This is done by abbreviation as in f-word; b-word; c-word; s-word; n-word; a-hole; etc. If this trend continues it will soon be necessary to communicate in politically correct shorthand. “U r an a-hole & full of s-word, so f-word off!” -and so on!

                               In the case of pictorial images there are more inconsistencies. For some reason, the sight of certain parts of the body is deemed to be so morally damaging that they must be covered –despite the fact that 50% of the population possesses and unavoidably sees all of those offensive parts on a daily basis! I remember way back in the ‘60’s the sight of a female nipple in a publication was an offense, particularly amongst America’s morally uprighteous. Despite this ban, one of the then fledging adult publications, I think it was “Playboy”, within its pages deliberately included an image of a breast, including the forbidden nipple.  Predictably this produced the expected degree of apoplexy amongst the self appointed up-tighteous custodians of morality. Representatives of the magazine duly appeared at a subsequent hearing to justify such blatant disregard of the rule. In their defense they showed the complete picture which turned out to be that of Johnny Weissmuller in his cinematic role as Tarzan!

                            More recently, the programme “Survivor” has achieved its success due at least in part to the sight of scantily clad, attractive young people disporting themselves in a variety of tropical settings. Here the public watchdogs have generously permitted the sights of abundant mammary cleavage to remain intact -to an arbitrary point, beyond which the offending area(s) are blurred out before anything as inflammatory as a nipple surfaces. However, there is now a new twist. During scenes where contestants are bending over, “bum cracks” now receive the blurring treatment! This "crack down" is particularly inexplicable. With no risk of deadly nipple exposure how on earth the mere sight of a portion of undulating anatomic topography can possibly be considered to present any risk to the viewer is beyond me. 

                           The extraordinary and sustained furor which erupted following Janet Jackson’s so called “wardrobe malfunction” at Superbowl XXXVII was also inexplicable. She actually was wearing a small floral disc (I think the correct term is “pastie”) to cover the demonic nipple so what was all the fuss about? This is an example of the neurosis that seems to grip the US psyche and nourished by the sensationalistic media. Just read the extent of the Wikipedia page on the subject:-

http://ewikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XXXVIII_halftime_show_controversy

                           Happily the rest of the world seems to be emerging from all this. Indeed there are an increasing number of TV stations, which provided that the requisite “viewer discretion” advisory precedes the transmission (-and which probably boosts viewership!), are showing programmes with language and bodily exposure which only a few years ago would have been out of the question.

                           I conclude with a famous story from the Scottish comedian Billy Connolly which gives some idea of how much more tolerent of Europe has become of "edgy" material. The joke was originally aired in the 1970’s when things were much more restricted and there was much sucking of teeth and serious misgivings about how it would be received. Nowadays it would be at worse considered to be in rather poor taste.

                           Billy recounted how a man confided to his friend in a pub that he had murdered his wife. Not surprisingly the friend refused to believe him whereupon he was taken to the man’s house where the dastardly deed took place. “I buried her in the back garden” he announced and invited his friend to look at her grave. Sure enough there was a mound of freshly dug earth but surprisingly the rear end of the body was still sticking above the ground. “Why did you leave her bum sticking out?” the friend exclaimed -to which the reply was. “Well, I needed somewhere to park my bike!” See:-   

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slw08b3bHFE