AW! Epistles
Put in Writing that You Do Not Believe in God. From D Welch
Abstract
Thursday, 27 October 2005
Mike, First I would like to know the reason why you went to all this trouble to post your ideas on the web. Second, you should tell the reader of your web site if you are an atheist or what. You should put it in writing that you do not believe in “god” and repudiate the idea of “god”, in all the various disguises, and sign it. [ It appears that you are “christian” when you use terms like BC and AD instead of using the modern terminology of BCE and CE ]. As regards all of your evidence, most educated people now days understand that the story of “jesus christ” is fiction, derived from many sources including jewish mythology, that itself was plagiarized from earlier religions and ideas.
It is all very well saying that educated people understand that Jesus Christ is a fiction, but are you right in saying this, and, if you are right, how did they learn it? These pages attempt to make it easy for people to have the clear evidence for dismissing patriarchal religious claims. As you rightly imply, religions, including Christianity, generally evolve, but most Christians, including some educated people think it was revealed. Perhaps there is no changing their minds, but when people feel ready to throw off superstition, they often look for support in their decision. I try to offer some. I also offer the history of these religions, for even some who are skeptical have not been able to find honest historical accounts because they do not exist. Religious history is always called sacred history, and that means it is not true. It is myth. As for telling the readers my own views, I think, if they are intelligent enough to read what I offer, they are intelligent enough to understand it. If they are still unsure, they have not read my e-pistles page, in which I debate with correspondents, mostly believers.
What I cannot understand is how after you railed into judaism and christianity, you would stand up and say that… “The Greek love of boys was perfectly innocent” … “Satyrs were playful and generally fair” … For youths there was a fine and healthy system of gymnastics“ … The Greek admiration of the human form” … and you go on to say … “Greek men thought the love of women ‘merely’ sensual, but the love of ‘young men’ virtuous” … you defend this behavior as being “innocent and not immoral” … and that the “Greek mysteries” were … “concentrated on the most ‘austere and pious’ elements” … and that “The most ‘essential’ condition to bear in mind is the ‘liberty’ the Greeks enjoyed.”
I guess that you are disagreeing with what I say, but you only give partial and sometimes inaccurate and misleading, because not complete, quotations in a tone of disapproval. You obviously disapprove of pederasty, and there are few these days who do not, but the point is that these days it is perverted, but for the Greeks generally it was not, and Jowett and Carpenter are cited in evidence. Why is love of boys perverted these days? It is because Christianity has made homosexuality a sin, and any adult male who likes boys is assumed to be a pervert. Well, it is the Christian’s own religion and they can make anything they like a sin—for themselves—and have declared any form of sex, without the approval of a church, to be a sin, though people were indulging in sex outside of marriage forever before Christianity was invented with its idiotic and, yes, perverted sacraments.
Perhaps you know something about satyrs that I do not. They are mythical beasts, though considered healthily lusty, and the bible exhorts us to multiply. Do you object to gymnastics or admiring the human form? Women were not the top of society either in Greece or in Judah. In Persia they had a much better status, but no one likes the ancient Persians these days, they all like the ancient Greeks and Jews despite their pecadillos. I say that Plato, considered even by the churches as the greatest philosopher, defended the Greek attitude and said it was not sordid. Must we take him to be a liar? You give a citation then in quotation marks that I cannot find on the page, but again, you aim it not at me, but at the people I am myself referencing, namely those I have just mentioned to you. I am the messenger here. You seem to have made up your mind about the Greeks, as many people have, but my point is that you and they have not properly considered the social situation of the time, and instead have tried to impose the grotesquely anti-sexual Christian sexual morality on to a society that had never heard of Christianity and would have thought it disgusting themselves if they had. Now you turn against the Greek mysteries for some unmentioned reason, even though they only admitted people of untarnished reputation, quite unlike Christianity that admits rogues and confidence tricksters and lets them rob the congregations wholesale. Finally, you seem to object to liberty.
Then you go on to glorify the Romans. Did you forget to sing the praises of Sparta? Are you saying that these perverted pederastic homosexual men are to be admired? Are you condoning this behavior, that has once again shown itself world wide in the 2002 church sex abuse scandal? Before you consider the liberty that those perverted men enjoyed as being “essential”, I think you should first make yourself clear as to how you feel about such perverted behavior. You are being read as leaning towards it. I wonder if you would sing the same tune if your own son was “seduced” by one of those ancient perverted thinking men. The world would be a better place without homosexual behavior in it.
Well, we shall have to disagree on that because there is no more essential time for homosexuality to be acceptable to us all. This week the British ruling elite that control the Labour Party have spoken about tax incentives to stimulate reproduction. This is in a world that it already full of six billion human beings. They talk about aid to the Third World and want our world to be in the same boat. There are too many people, and soon there will be massive famines and disease infestations like the bird flu when millions will die. Now, you might have noticed that homosexuals do not reproduce. That might be Nature’s way of preventing overcrowding, and it is a way that the Christian church has prevented from operating properly. I do not agree with homosexuals having sex with young people, but I do not agree with heterosexuals having sex with them either. Young people need to be kept innocent until they are old enough to choose their own fancies. But whatever consenting adults do in private is none of my business and none of yours either.
Just a couple of points of fact. The Spartans were Greeks. The Romans were just like the Christians in their attitude to homosexuality. They were utterly against it in the mass, and only relatively few wealthy Romans indulged in it. The rigorous anti-homosexual attitude of the church might have come from the Roman underclass who were the first Christians. I said that the essential condition to bear in mind was liberty, not whatever you were trying to twist it into, to suit yourself. I am in favour of liberty, and that is one reason why I disagree with Christians, who never have been. They seem to be, in this modern period, because the enlightenment has forced them to be, but it ought to be clear that modern fundamentalist Christians are no better than fundamentalist Moslems or the Catholic Church of the middle ages when people for centuries were tortured to death if they disagreed with Christianity. Fundamentalists want everybody to agree with them. That is not liberty, and they are the danger to the world as we know it.
Why do you refer to them as “christian values” …people with values that know the difference between “right and wrong” behavior alike hold distain for homosexual behavior. The idea of being “tolerant” to it while teaching “children” that they should ‘understand’ that some times other kids have “two mommies” or “two daddies” is corrupting children before they fully understand what sex is about and the reasons how and why we got here.
Refer to what as “Christian values”? I do not know what you are saying except that it seems to be intolerant.
To condone homosexual behavior as something that “is needed” is to fully miss the point. Saying such an asinine thing reflects more on the speaker’s values than on society today.
You put “is needed” in quotation marks presumably to suggest I had written it in my previous letter. Where is it? You seem to have a habit of making up for yourself something and then answering it as if I had said it. If I knew what you were referring to, I could accept or reject your judgement of it as asinine.
Why do you attack christianity with such fever and miss the fact that homosexuals in Arab countries lose their heads and hands or worse. Homosexual behavior has been appalled ever since there has been culture and society and people that know the difference between “correct human” and “animal behavior”.
I attack Christianity with fervour because of its appalling history. That does not mean that I defend Islam. Islam and Christianity have the same roots in Judaism, the origin of hate for homosexuals, and so I include Islam in my condemnation of patriarchal religions. They are all horrible. I cannot specifically criticize Islam because I do not know enough about it specifically, but doubtless others can do that job. So far, I have not got to the end of criticizing Christianity, despite megabites of pages. It is because Christianity is actually—that is when measured against what it really has done in the world—utterly wicked. The book of the wickedness of Christianity is much bigger than the bible itself.
It is not just the “christian family values” of this country has places such a perverted and negative label on homosexual behavior, it is condemned throughout cultures using moral reasoning.
Another citation that I cannot find in my earlier letter. Are you citing from somewhere else, because, if you are, it would be easier for me to reply to know it? No doubt you will explain what this moral reasoning is that is so important that it generates fervid hatred when killing people by the townload is considered all right by nearly all Christians whether leaders or led.
I need not go into the Holy Qur’an with you, but needless to say the Prophet is not for it.
That might be so, but none of us know what the Prophet did in private, now, do we? And, if the prophet was not for it, there are large numbers of his followers who are, and for a simple enough reason. They are poor and cannot afford to keep a wife and children, and often cannot get a woman of their own when rich men are allowed to have more than one. They therefore satisfy their frustrations in homosexuality, if they are sensible, or suicidal hatred, if they are not.
For you to say that, “…there is no more ‘essential time’ for homosexuality to be “acceptable” to us all” … is to pigeon hole yourself with those who would sweep under the carpet your “christian priests” that got away with all of that child molesting.
Now you are getting carried away with your own passion and ignoring what I have said. There is a difference between homosexuality and pederasty. I agree with you that no adult should sexually molest children in our society. As long as they do not, they can do as they like in private, and it is none of your concern. That is what I said. Priests molesting choirboys, or choir girls for that matter, is a crime that should not be tolerated by the law. If priests want to hold on to their vow of celibacy by sublimating their sexual urges with others priests, then it is a matter only for themselves, and their God, since they are believers.
Let me explain something to you. The “theory” of evolution is now proven to be factual, and therefore we can explain why we share 99 percent of the same DNA with chimpanzees. Through the study of evolutionary anthropology and comparative psychology we can now trace the origins of human behavior to our primate ancestors. One peculiar human behavior has been observed in many of our animal ancestors. Not only is “warfare” and “killing for the sake of killing” observed in our primate ancestors, but also a very strange and confusing behavior as well.
Research done by people like Jane Goodall, and her Gombe chimps, Takayoshi Kano, and his work in the Wamba forest of Zaire, and Amy Parish, at the San Diego wild animal park, not to mention countless others, all confirm that homosexual behavior is observed and implemented by our animal ancestors.
Others in ancient history understood this too. “Pan” the lusty “playful” satyr [ cf : “Satyriasis”] that taught the “ephebe” how to play the “ugab” or panpipe, was a representation of that ancient “pederastic” homosexual behavior. “Bes” the fat drunken jovial “silenus” old man who courted around with “maeneads” with five o’clock shadow worse than his, represented the lowest debauchery from sexual norms.
The point is now in today’s day and age, with the condition of the planet, the actions going on world wide with governments tooling up to fight for the last remaining drops of oil in the ground, pollution on a global scale effecting the health and well being of the planet’s animals that human has polluted… Global warming melting everything in sight… the oceans warming and rising killing coral and breeding mutant algae… new diseases that will cross-breed from animals to humans, like mad cow and bird flu, all brought on by the actions of human… sewage being used for fertilizer on crops for human consumption… sewage contaminating rivers and seas, changing the sexual characteristics of the fish in them… PBDE’s and DDT that are causing polar bears in the arctic to become hermaphroditic… all of this is because of human actions.
The population of the planet is now at around 6.5 billion people…and expected to double in about 42 years or so…that would leave the inhabitants with a quality of life that would hardly be worth living. Unless we can educate people to see and understand the needs and sacrifices they will have to make regarding their own personal choices about family size and reproductive freedoms, then the population will continue to rise and the living conditions will continue to deteriorate. That will breed even more disease and natural events that will control population on a global scale. That is how evolution works. As I write this right now evolution is causing the elephants in Asia to lose their tusks. They have been preyed upon to the extent that surviving individuals are living because their DNA causes them not to grow tusks. Therefore the tuskless elephants are not being poached and have a better chance of survival. That is evolution in effect. And the same thing will happen to human.
Human needs to adopt and care for the dying children already on this planet, not breed more. An estimated 40,000 children die every day from malnutrition and disease.
So far you are talking a lot of sense except for a few silly value judgments about Satyrs that just suit your worst prejudices. Now you proceed to draw the opposite conclusion from me, and one that seems perverse in the light of what you have just listed about the problems of overpopulation.
The last thing this planet needs is the attitude the homosexual behavior is “OK”. It is not “OK” it should always be avoided, it is ‘animal behavior’ not human behavior. To evolve into something that is fully human we must understand this. Our species has no chance to ever colonize space or leave this planet while still clinging to those ancient “animal” ideas that we need to fight and have wars and build enough nuclear weapons to destroy this planet over and over and over again. Our DNA is not worthy to colonize space.
You really are quite bizarre in your ideas. You ignore the real problem, even though you correctly appreciate it, while raving on about what people do to each other in bed. You are quite right about war and so on, but utterly crazy when it comes to sex. Incidentally, we are animals ourselves, so what is wrong with us behaving like animals in some innocent sexual way. You say we are 99 per cent the same as chimps in our DNA, but the pigmy chimp actually uses sex as a comfort between close adults and between parents and children. If you mean what you say about evolution then you have to recognize its implications. Incidentally, the whole question of apes killing each other remains moot. They certainly do it, but some behaviourists think it is partially caused by the stress these ape colonies have been put under through their loss of habitat, and being constantly observed and interfered with by human beings.
Education is the only way to bring people to realize that we need to control human numbers, but NOT with perversions that have been recognized as such for as long as there has been writing.
Well, we began this discussion with the Greeks who did not consider homosexually a perversion at all, and arguably had the highest civilisation ever known. Your argument is pure bigotry.
All behavior is determined by the combined effects of “heredity and environment”. The combined influence of genes and environment determines behavior. You have no excuse son, you were not born that way, you are “acting gay”.
Thankfully, I am not your son, and you have no knowledge at all of what my heredity—the same heredity you have just accepted partly determines behaviour—is. You have no idea whether some people are born gay or not, though the evidence is in favour of it, because the mechanisms of sexual determination are getting to be known and explained. What is your bigoted line on people who are born with both male and female sexual organs? Should they be hung drawn and quartered?
Male-Female intercourse. Intercourse between the male and the female involves the sexual organs. No male should ever want to have anal intercourse with a female. The anus is not a sexual organ. Anal intercourse is unnatural and a perversion from male-female reproductive sexual intercourse. It is a perversion that gay men perform. It is not something straight males would want to perform on a female. If any man wants to perform such behavior to a female, that male would be said to have homosexual tendencies. Not only is it unnatural and against straight male-female reproductive intercourse, it is also disease and bacteria spreading behavior that of course should always be avoided. For a male to say to a female that he wants to perform such perverted behavior is not showing respect or proper “love” to that female. All females should be strong and say “NO” if ever asked by a male to perform such behavior. All such females that have to “put up” with their “man’s” strange behavior should look for a straight male partner, and not one showing “homosexual tendencies”. All anal sex is “gay”. It is not straight “love”.
I reckon you are perverted yourself, Old Man.
So unless the entire population of the planet can be educated as to the needs of “future generations” and the influences on the present generations, that will create those future generations, then the future for human looks as bleak as the one human has created for the rest of his primate ancestors. If Ebola decimates the primates, and habitat destruction leaves them no where to live, then can we not also see humans fate?
Sure thing! So why don’t you do something useful about it instead of mentally masturbating, the way you do, over these issues that obsess you. Stop spilling the mental seed on the ground, Old Fellah, and take up the serious issues you raise. If you cannot, you prove you are a pervert yourself.
Answer this for me, how would you approach a militant Muslim and tell him that everything he believes in is wrong for humanity? How are you going to pry his book of worship out of his hands, unless you are willing to throw yours away also? Those same hands have so much faith that they strap on explosives to their “vest” and wear it with pride believing what they are doing is “pleasing to ‘god’ ”. Are you or anyone else going to tell them that there is a better “god” for them to believe in? NO. Unless the entire planet can realize what religion is, and see that it is an ancient antiquated system of fear and belief, that is not needed anymore, and that causes people to get so hysterical in there beliefs that they would try to “defend god”, the species of human will not evolve past this black spot in history. There will be no more “history”.
Too true, but you are not too coherent are you? You are supposed to be arguing against me, aren’t you?
Human must realize that to evolve means to outgrow religion. All religions. What is needed for every person on the planet is to realize that they all have to work together to achieve one global society of humans free from hate and fear of each other. Religion breeds hate and fear. Religion get in the way of human’s belief system and causes them to err in judgement as to their actions. I see a very bleak future unless human can evolve past his ‘perversions’ and ancient beliefs that hold him back from becoming a higher form of life than the ‘animals.’
And, it seems the main obstacle to this, according to you, is the one thing that the patriarchal religions agree upon—the wickedness of homosexuality. As I said, you are not coherent. Try reading some of the pages and they might help you. And try writing to one person at a time—half of what you cited was nothing I had written. You might at least sound more coherent.
