Mid-west Humanists – An Irish Atheist Community

God gets quite irate…

Filed under: humanism | Leave a comment »

I feel that we need to become more catholic in our musical tastes.  ScientificGospel.com  is a music gerne created by Dr. Stephen Baird to spread scientific knowledge and argue for rational enquiry and thought.  Here is an example of their work.

Filed under: humanism | Leave a comment »

Oh look, the Muslims-extremists are vociferously offended, again…

Is the world going mad?  Johann Hari, the British human-rights campaigner and columnist, wrote a passionate defence of enlightenment principles in an opinion-piece for the UK Independent which was subsequently re-printed by the liberal Indian-daily, the Statesman.  The article was titled “Why should I respect oppressive religions?”  As usual with Hari’s writing, it pulled no punches and was both accurate and thought-provoking, and alarming  for those of us that respect universal human-rights and freedom of speech.

The Statesman’s editor Ravindra Kumar and publisher Anand Sinha were detained in Calcutta after complaints and a week of rioting.  The Statesman wrote the following in defence of publishing the article.

The Statesman had reprinted Hari’s article because “it mourned the marginalisation of the middle, liberal path in modern society”. It added: “The Statesman has always upheld secular values and has a record of providing space to all viewpoints, even contentious ones. If we were unable to fulfil this role, we would rather cease publication with honour than compromise our basic values.

 Just how far are the ideals of the enlightenment being eroded by militant religion?  Perceived offence, and our inability to fight for what we believe in, is being used against us to become the modus operandi of the ignorant and the reactionary.  We should be outraged by the dissemination of our freedom of expression.   As Hari wrote.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights stated 60 years ago that “a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief is the highest aspiration of the common people”. It was a Magna Carta for mankind – and loathed by every human rights abuser on earth. Today, the Chinese dictatorship calls it “Western”, Robert Mugabe calls it “colonialist”, and Dick Cheney calls it “outdated”. The countries of the world have chronically failed to meet it – but the document has been held up by the United Nations as the ultimate standard against which to check ourselves. Until now.

Starting in 1999, a coalition of Islamist tyrants, led by Saudi Arabia, demanded the rules be rewritten. The demand for everyone to be able to think and speak freely failed to “respect” the “unique sensitivities” of the religious, they decided – so they issued an alternative Islamic Declaration of Human Rights. It insisted that you can only speak within “the limits set by the shariah [law]. It is not permitted to spread falsehood or disseminate that which involves encouraging abomination or forsaking the Islamic community”.

In other words, you can say anything you like, as long as it precisely what the reactionary mullahs tell you to say. The declaration makes it clear there is no equality for women, gays, non-Muslims, or apostates. It has been backed by the Vatican and a bevy of Christian fundamentalists.

 

Clearly they are succeeding – we are inexorably giving up our freedoms in the name of unwarranted respect for stone-age myths and intolerance and we should all be disgusted and angry.  It seems clear to me that respect for Muslims only applies to the oppressors, respect will certainly not be afforded a female Muslim, or a gay Muslim, or a Muslim who has the temerity to disagree.  Hari has defended his position and I salute and respect the man for taking a stand for us all.

Filed under: humanism | 4 Comments »

A theocracy can loosely be defined as ‘A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.’  It seems clear that Italy is, in fact a theocracy by proxy.  

Eluana Englaro has been in a vegetative-state since a car crash in 1992 and Italy’s top court ruled last year that she should be allowed to die.  Eluana has severe brain-damage and last Friday her doctors began the process of allowing her to die with dignity at the behest of her suffering family.  Her father has fought for 10 years based on his assertion that Eluana made it clear prior to the injury that she would prefer death, as opposed to the living-death she has endured for the past 17 years.  This tragedy shares the same sordid and appalling link between religious interference and secular government as the Terri Schiavo case in the 2005.   In a bid to keep Englaro alive, Premier Silvio Berlusconi’s (who is so confused about Eluana’s medical condition that it his contention that she should be kept alive as she is still able able to have children!) center-right government passed an emergency decree Friday saying that feeding and hydration cannot be suspended for patients who depend on it.  There are even stories in the Italian press that Berlusconi embarked on a frantic phone call with the Vatican prior to the decision.  President Napolitano, showing both empathy for family, and respect for secular law, informally expressed perplexity regarding the decree, stating that he would not sign it.  There is now a race for Berlusconi to race the bill through the Italian Parliament so that the wishes of Eluana, and her family can be sacrificed on the alter of religious-inspired righteousness.

So here again we have religious dogma distorting secular government.  It is true that euthanasia is illegal in Italy, but after a long battle Eluana’s father has managed to persuade the Italian court system that she should be allowed to stop keeping her alive via hydration and food.  Clearly then, the legality of euthanasia in Italian law is now a moot-point.  Eluana should be allowed to die with dignity, and not to linger with no hope of recovery – against her, and her family’s wishes.  

Enter religion.  The Catholic church, exercising all the skills of hyperbole at it’s disposal ensures us that Eluana has been ‘condemned to die of hunger of thirst’,  Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, the pope’s health minister, told La Repubblica that removing Englaro’s feeding tube “is tantamount to an abominable assassination”.  Cardinal Antonelli said, “Eluana is in a ‘vegetative state,’ but she is not a vegetable. She is a person who is sleeping,” he said. “The person, also when she is sleeping or disabled, retains all of her dignity. The person is valuable in herself, not for what she produces or consumes, or for the pleasure or satisfaction she gives to others.”  So this poor woman is only sleeping?  I have been unable to find any neurological credentials in the good cardinal’s education resume, so it seems that he is not talking from an informed position – as an expert on cognitive function, and neurological damage, but from an ignorant position of religious dogma, a dogma that deals in absolutes.  I would also invite the good Cardinel to sit besides a patient who cannot communicate and is only waiting for death, so he can enjoy for himself the dignity and mystery of the suffering.  He might also ask Eluana’s family to describe to him the ‘pleasure and satisfaction’, they have enjoyed over the past 17 years before making such offensive comments.

But let us look for a moment at contemporary position of the RC  ‘sanctity of life’ – which, when you consider that Christianity is nothing more than a death-cult is laughable.  The head of the Catholic Church in Mozambique told the BBC  in 2007 that he believes some European-made condoms are infected with HIV deliberately.  Maputo Archbishop Francisco Chimoio claimed some anti-retro-viral drugs were also infected “in order to finish quickly the African people”.  How many have died,  (in a country where about one in six of the 19 million citizens are HIV-positive and about 500 people are infected each day) – how many children have been orphaned as a result of the Vatican’s position on contraception in sub-Saharan Africa?   The sanctity of life was not a position to be concerned with when the RC church had control over Europe and routinely tortured and murdered for – well whatever the current superstition was. 

Religious dogma should not still be infecting liberal, secular politics – just as I believe everybody has a human right to life, everyone also has a right to a dignified death.  Euthanasia is an emotive subject.  I would accept that people can have a reasonable,secular position on euthanasia both for and against – and we should engage in the discourse.  But whatever moral authority religion deems itself to have is a well-documented myth, and religion has no right to dictate to a suffering family or a secular state – there can be no legitimate argument who’s central thesis comes from the bible and dogma.  I think it clear that the ‘pro-life’ (when is suits) lobby is religious in nature and dogmatic in doctrine.  It is not amenable to rational discourse or a change in position (except when it suits) – and the Italian government would be well-advised to keep their sanctimonious posturing closer to home.  Berlusconi’s moral authority is at the very least, questionable, and I would have thought that the Italian government would have far more pressing things to worry about than intruding into the private misery of an already devastated family.

An excellent article on this subject can be found here.

Filed under: humanism | 3 Comments »

I am currently learning to play the piano – inspired largely by this man, and the music of the great German Beethoven.  Enjoy

Filed under: humanism | 1 Comment »