St Pauls closed

You're almost certainly aware of the anti-capitalist protests around the world recently, and may be aware St Pauls Cathedral in London had to close for health and safety concerns. Normally I wouldn't care that much, there's even a great deal I disagree with the protesters about.

The reason I'm talking about this is that it's leader, the Reverend Knowles, made an annoying statement. He called the protesters "a lesser cause", and should show respect to their "more ancient institution". That's right, one of the Church of England's highest officials thinks the global economic problem, whether or not the protesters are exactly correct, is less important than their church services. Then justifies his point of view by saying it's older.

Ugh...

End of the world

Remember six months a go when Harold Camping said the world would end? And then it didn't? You might also remember he tried to justify his error by claiming it was a "silent" judgement day, and the actual reckoning would happen on the 21/10/2011. That's today!

I don't know about you, but the weather here is a bit dire. Apart from that the apocalypse seems a little pleasant so far.

Religion's manipulation of the young

Meet 4 year old Kanon. A preacher.

This makes me sad. It just shows how unfortunate it can be when children are exposed to one faith over another before being old enough to make up their own minds. It's disgusting how they cheer him on...

Governor Perry's Prayer Rally

Tomorrow Governor Perry of Texas USA is holding a prayer rally in Austin, that is strictly Christian. Adverts for the event included the state seal of Texas, and therefore Perry is guilty of a branch of US government endorsing one religious view over another. This is of course is unconstitutional according to American law.

Unfortunately the Freedom From Religion Foundation's case against him was dismissed. Which is silly, if he held an Islamic rally there would be no problem by the Christian majority in seeing the illegality. Anyway.

It makes you wonder the meaning of this rally. Does Governor Perry doubt his abilities? "Dear Lord, I as the governor of Texas am quite unable to govern effectively. Therefore I request divine intervention to guide the policies I am too incompetent to implement. Amen."

Many of my favourite presenters of the Atheist Experience are heading there to protest, it is their home state after all. What is interesting though is that the Westboro Baptist Church are protesting too in some sort of bizarre unholy alliance.

Jim Alistair demands apology from "blasphemous" placard waver

Jim Allistair is actually a prick. I mean seriously. He's this right wing nut over here in Northern Ireland who decided to form his own splinter party after his original one decided to cooperate with those of opposing ideologies.

Anyway, at Belfast Gay Pride some parader held up a sign reading "Jesus had two dads, and he turned out fine". He's now demanding an apology claiming that it was "highly offensive."

The man in question had held up the sign at the Christian protesters, from the loving folks at the Free Presbyterian Church. While I agree the sign was genuinely offensive to those of a theistic persuasion, it is still no grounds to demand an apology.

Considering the Presbyterians were at the parade declaring through speaker phones that all homosexuals were inherently sinful despite it being beyond their control and were therefore deserving of eternal torment for the gender they happened to love, *breath*, I don't think Jim has much of a case.

As such I think I'm more than justified in saying there are no grounds for apology, considering it was exercising of free speech, significantly less offensive on the marcher's behalf and there being zero legal grounds.

Sharia Law in London

I find myself in an unusual position in that I'm agreeing with the Daily Mail, a newspaper I'm often at odds with. I read their article about radical Muslim preachers placing the London district of Waltham Forest under Sharia law. These radicals and their younger male followers are reportedly on local patrols, reminding people of their manifesto outlined in the flyer above.

While totally unenforceable and completely irrelevant legally it still represents a growing concern. While the Daily Mail dislikes this because of its stance on immigration and nationalism, I am alarmed simply because these "laws" are based on an immoral theological foundation.

Sharia is distinctly resonant of Old Testament morality: the stoning of adulterers, degradation of women and suppression of free speech. While some moral laws proposed are almost admirable, like the condemnation of murder, others are largely unnecessary in a 21st century city. Take for example the banning of alcohol and gambling. Sure, they cause problems, but not enough to merit their removal from society! People really enjoy them and rarely with negative consequences.

They even outlaw porn because some 5th century madman said it was bad. I can't understand it. I think Stephen Fry puts it well, "sex is fun, it's jolly and people enjoy it. It's a lot like food in that respect. The only people who are obsessed with food are the anorexic and the morbidly obese. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is religion in a nutshell." Provided it's safe (sharia condemns contraception, especially on the part of the female) and consenting, sex is perfectly ok.

I should note that these hate-mongers are a minority. The majority of Muslims in targeted areas don't condone the extremists' actions.

I'm surprised people like this go so public, I echo the thoughts of the Daily Mail journalist when I fear an attack like the one in Norway from these people on the city.

Norway shootings and religious belief

I'm sure you're aware of the recent Norway terrorist attacks, one in Oslo and the other at a youth camp on the island of Utoya. It's a tragic thing, and in my view it highlights the dangers of religious belief.

The attacks were carried out by Anders Breivik, a far-left anti-Islam extremist who sought to remove multiculturalism and Islam from Europe to keep it "Christian."

The attacks were intended to raise awareness of his beliefs, not as a direct offense against immigrants in Norway. He thought such an action would only cause the public to sympathise for them. In regards to the civilian wounded and dead, he says it was a "necessary atrocity". His motivations are very disturbing, outlined in his manifesto. I've only read summaries of it, it would take days to go over it all.

It includes instructions on how to arm yourself for anti-Islamic violence in gruesome detail, as well as his militant views against feminism, homosexuality, atheism, political correctness (which he claims is a variant of Marxism) and Islam. There's even a section on how his new world would work, from government to agriculture.

Anders attacked the camp because it was owned by the Norwegian Labour Party, which he disdained for its liberal policies on immigration. His lawyers are pleading clinical insanity because his views and actions are so non-sensical.

I find this disturbing primarily because of how he was motivated; his religious belief. Granted, it was not totally a theological thing, there were political grievances too. But my point is that without religion he wouldn't have so readily threatened by the peaceful "Islamisation" of Europe. No atheist has ever threatened to fly planes into skyscrapers or shoot up schools. A godless rational mind would resort to political activism (of the non-militant kind!) at most.

And many right-wing Christian media have been decrying the Christian motivation, such as Conservapedia and Bill O'Reilly etc.

Which is of course ridiculous. He was certainly a Christian, Bill. His manifesto includes a section of Christian templars he venerates, including Vlad the Impaler.

The point to take from this is that all irrational religious belief is dangerous, even moderate belief. It can act as a gateway to extremism. Usually this is the case for Islam but Anders shows it can happen in Christianity as well.

I hate this time of year

(If only the LOL in the image stood for "laugh out loud", in this context it means "loyal orange lodge")

Tomorrow is the 12th of July and to the enlightened world that isn't a significant date. However, here in the backwards province of Northern Ireland half the population feels the need to celebrate an obscure and inconsequential event in history that for the most part they don't understand.

For those of you who don't know (and I envy you), protestant unionists in NI have parades on the 12th July to celebrate the victory of William of Orange at the Battle of the Boyne, where he defeated his catholic rival for the English throne in Ireland. Unionists in NI celebrate this every year about this time and all it ever does is piss off the catholic nationalists.

They jumped on this event like insects to a lamp, yet it barely represents what they think it does. For one thing, William never gave a flying fuck about Ulster protestants, his only interest was in shutting Ireland up so he could concentrate on other wars. It in no way represented a victory of English loyalism over Irish nationalism, the pope even backed William! And yet they burn the effigy of his Holiness every year.

Flags go up everywhere, the unionists even put up Israeli flags in response to the nationalists flying Palestinian ones. Such disgusting self-aggrandisement; no community here can identify with that conflict in the middle-east.

The bonfires just get bigger every year, the one in Ballykeel is easlily 30m ,and if it were to topple it would set alight the whole settlement. At least that would be them burning their own homes down, not just the nationalists.

Look at all the bullshit so far already, over fucking flags. It makes me feel ashamed to be associated with this tiny country that is so divided over such obscure differences. I can't follow the logical pathway that leads someone to care so much about something as arbitrary as a country's allegiance.

Anyway, rant over. This time of year always puts me in a bad mood.