Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Huh? What is he even saying!?

I read this quote from a patriarchal bloke.  Seriously.  I read it four times.  I still don't know what the hell he is talking about.  Someone please interpret this for me.  Is he for or against polygamy.  What does marital licensing from the state have to do with polygamy.  What the hell is this guy saying!?

My favorite part:

Just these couple of sentences bring up lots of issues. I’m very interested in any opinions on this (as long as they are Christian). The others…I have no clue how to deal with people who don’t have a moral authority in their life. Go somewhere else.

Nice.  He's asking questions about morality and then claims others have no moral authority.  What the hell is he asking questions for then?  If HE has moral authority in his life, he should know all the answers.

Yeah yeah...  I know.  You'll come back with "he's asking for interpretation from the Bible - God's word - which is the TRUE moral authority.

Tell that to the raped and murdered women, men, and children, upon God's orders, in that moral book.  Tell that to the slaves that were not Jewish.  Tell that to the millions and billions of people who didn't get the riddle of life just right, so they ended up dead and in hell.  Tell that to homosexuals, whom God ordered murdered.  Tell that to women who didn't scream while being raped - who also were ordered to be murdered because, obviously, they wanted it. (The man got to go free, by the way.)

Yeah...don't even begin to talk to me about moral authority while waving the Bible in my face.


  1. He is telling his wife to run. Fast. Other than that, I have not a clue as to what this raving lunatic is trying to learn or say.

  2. This is the Big Lie told by religionists, the supreme misstatement that only religious people, only those who believe in a gawd can be moral and just. Catholic bishops insist that only they have moral authority and meanwhile they have none. The clergy abuse scandal and their scapegoating of gays are but two reasons why they lost it entirely.

    Each person must be their own moral authority. It's hard work but otherwise other people and groups ride roughshod over your life.

    Read "The Dangerous Appeal of Moral Authority" by Nicki Stern.

  3. It's men like that which make me ashamed to identify as Christian. If I were to describe him in reference to a donkey's behind would demean all donkeys. I sure wish Balaam's Ass came back from the dead and delivered a 4-legged roundhouse kick to men like him.

  4. And yet, the author of this blog wasn't even aware of the child sacrificing practices of the people Israel conquered when I asked him the question. He plays the expert, and yet isn't familiar with his subjects. If you were intellectually honest, you'd at least raise the issues I have raised, regardless of your opinion on then. That is what is amazing. In your quest for knowledge from an atheistic perspective, believing you came from nothing or some mysterious eternal matter that does not exist, you choose to ignore anything against your line of thinking. You don't even have the decency for honest discussion, but rather ranting and mocking. You can't find God for the same reason you can't find a police man. You don't want to find Him, and you hate Him regardless of whether He is good or evil. Knowledge is the last thing you are seeking. You are following your own religion. You are as religious as any other man.

    1. Go ahead and defend a god who has reasons for murdering innocent nations - including children. Why? Because their parents didn't agree with him.

      I don't give a flying you know what whether that god had an issue with spitting on the sidewalk to excuse his genocidal actions. For you to try and catch me in a knowledge game (which I could win at because I don't spend my time trying to make excuses for stupid bile in the Bible, which I know like the back of my hand) and give that god a pass because you have some lousy proof that the babies he ordered killed were in a country where they sacrificed children makes you a very sick man.

      I hope you think about your actions before you carry out a murderous attack on an entire family because they are against your god. I pity your view of life.

    2. Oh my. Isn't this interesting. Jordan seems to have it all figured out! Let me see if I am intellectually honest enough to decipher the moral fortitude of the all knowing and intellectually honest Jordan. I am just a silly little atheist, but I will do my best. It will be difficult due to the eloquence and nuance combined with irrefutable proof and dashing genius of the reply. The pressure is almost unbearable.

      I would like to know where in the bible it states that you must capitalize pronouns when referencing your god. I only ask because I know your god is one arrogant figment of man's imagination, but even though he is only a projection of one's self, it seems a bit over the top to show proper respect to a pronoun. But since you took liberties in construct of capitalization, I will take liberties in spelling. I will now call it dog.

      You have a collection of stories. They aren't based on dog, but on man's desires funneled through dog. Dog isn't real. Your stories are just that. Therefore, there can not be honest discussion about "facts" because you don't have any. Your idea of discussion is forcing your twisted inner sickness on others and using dog and a book of tales to do so. You haven't found dog. No one hates dog. Because dog isn't real. That was the easy part. Here is where it gets tricky. Feel free to read it more than once and phone a friend if you feel the need.

      You can not justify your delusions by imposing a non existant delusion upon your opposition. I can find an officer of the law (not police man because that would suggest that only men are officers) because they don't hide in clouds. I would go to the police station to find a police officer. Unlike churches, we can enter that building and find exactly what we are looking for. They also drive cars that say, "HERE IS AN OFFICER WOOO WOOOO!" (They don't really say that. I thought I should clear that up because you seem to take things in writing kind of too literally)

      "Mysterious eternal matter" sounds cool. But we have no idea what (because it is in your head and science does not refer to anything as mysterious, eternal matter) you are talking about. That is not due to our lack of knowledge but yours.

      You see, atheists seek knowledge. We can gain knowledge of the bible by reading it. We now know what it says. But our facts and truths are not based upon interpretation and feelings of superiority because we found a way to justify our own sickness in a book of tales.

      In order to have an accurate barometer of decency, you must be able to measure your own by your own empathy. You can never measure the decency of a human being based upon their unwillingness to stoop to play your games of delusion. Your book will lead you only where you want to go. It has no power other than what you give it. It isn't dog at work. It is you.

      If you look hard enough, you will find a justification or condemnation of every urge, emotion and human weakness. It is your humanity that makes the choice. We don't need your book. We use our minds and empathy. You can't understand this so you hang your hopes upon the words of dog. They aren't dog's words. They are yours. This renders debate useless. We don't debate fantasy and delusion.

      No decent human being will engage in a debate over whether or not murder in the name of dog is acceptable. The sane know that it is not. You are not sane. You are not intellectually honest. I know this because you base your judgements on the words in a book. They are words you want to see. They are feelings you want to justify. When we seek knowledge, what we are actually looking for in people like yourselves, is what is wrong with you and how you can be so blind. We know the book. We are wondering how you do not.

      That, Jordan, is how to mock.

      I, unlike IC, do not pity your view of life. I pity those within your eyesight. Let's just hope you destroy yourself before others. You are well on your way to both. Get help. Now.

  5. He’s saying men should be allowed to have multiple wives because it’s in the Bible, and if the first wife doesn’t like it and leaves, she should be shunned by the church for getting a divorce. He's saying, “We men are loyal even when our wives give us crap like getting fat– but women are the disloyal ones who get divorces. So we should take back the biblical mandate that men can have as many wives as they want and that women can’t get divorces.” He’s saying the state have laws against polygamy, but he doesn’t recognize the state as having any authority over marriage. And he’s saying that what men give their wives in marriage is support, and what women give their husbands in marriage is sex– so if men have to pay spousal support after a divorce, women should have to give sex after a divorce.

    What a disgusting, mercenary, self-serving view of marriage. And what a horrible way to view women.

  6. My, that is horrible. And unbiblical.....jewish dudes actually owed their wives food and sex, legally. The idea that sex is something women give men to get stuff is fairly recent; it's total BS, too. :)

    As far as belief goes- I believe in the existence of God. I am a christian, though I sometimes feel the very un-christlike urge to punch patriarchal dudes who misuse the term. I also believe that to say that all non-christians have no morals requires a very special kind of stupid- it makes about as much sense as saying that all non-complementarians have terrible marriages, (I am in no way a comp myself) and I would expect to hear both arguments from the same place. I have an idea of your opinions about God from reading your blog, I.C., and while I don't agree with them,and some of them make me sad, I in no way think you are less of a moral person than I am because of them. Actually, I think that unless everything on your blog is completely fabricated, which seems unlikely, you are an excellent husband and father and a generally decent guy.

    1. Thanks. I'd love to think highly of myself. I seem to struggle more than most. But thank you again for your kind words.