13.Feb.2013 - DOCUMENTARIES: Networked Society, Supersize Me, Bad Behavior Online, Clean Technology Future, Food Speculator

Life in a Networked Society

Technologies enable people to interact, innovate and share information in totally new ways. People are empowered, business is liberated and the society is more transparent. But how to take advantage of all this? And what does it take to become a networked society?

Supersize Me – Morgan Spurlock vs McDonald’s Fastfood

While examining the influence of the fast food industry, Morgan Spurlock personally explores the consequences on his health of a diet of solely McDonald’s food for one month.
Super Size Me is a 2004 American documentary film directed by and starring Morgan Spurlock, an American independent filmmaker. Spurlock’s film follows a 30-day period from February 1 to March 2, 2003 during which he ate only McDonald’s food. The film documents this lifestyle’s drastic effect on Spurlock’s physical and psychological well-being, and explores the fast food industry’s corporate influence, including how it encourages poor nutrition for its own profit.
Spurlock dined at McDonald’s restaurants three times per day, eating every item on the chain’s menu at least once. Spurlock consumed an average of 20.92 megajoules or 5,000 kcal (the equivalent of 9.26 Big Macs) per day during the experiment.
As a result, the then-32-year-old Spurlock gained 24½ lbs. (11.1 kg), a 13% body mass increase, a cholesterol level of 230, and experienced mood swings, sexual dysfunction, and fat accumulation in his liver. It took Spurlock fourteen months to lose the weight gained from his experiment using a vegan diet supervised by his future wife, a chef who specializes in gourmet vegan dishes.
The reason for Spurlock’s investigation was the increasing spread of obesity throughout U.S. society, which the Surgeon General has declared “epidemic,” and the corresponding lawsuit brought against McDonald’s on behalf of two overweight girls, who, it was alleged, became obese as a result of eating McDonald’s food.
The documentary was nominated for an Academy Award for Documentary Feature.

Bad Behavior Online: Bullying, Trolling and Free Speech

The internet is a powerful tool for communication, but it can sometimes be a double-edged sword. As most of us have seen or experienced, the internet can bring out the worst behavior in people, highlighting some of the cruelest and most hurtful aspects of humanity. Issues such as bullying online and trolling have garnered a lot of attention recently, prompting questions about who does, and should, regulate the internet, and what free speech means online.

The Clean Technology Future

What if we could live in a clean world?A world in which energy would be 100% renewable, water no longer polluted, transportation truly green and production methods clean and regenerative? There will be such a world. This documentary explores the unprecedented possibilities of a new industrial revolution: Cleantech.
Signs of a new future are visible everywhere, from China to the US and from Europe to Thailand. Green mobility powered by sustainable energy, clean drinking water for all thanks to nanotechnology, dyeing textiles using recycled CO2. All of this is possible and is happening successfully now! Working together with Cleantech-founder Nick Parker, this film shows what our world will be like in the decades to come. The film team travels the world in search of a clean future.

The Food Speculator

The film examines the global commodities futures markets and aims to understand the role of speculation on food prices.
Assuming the role of a speculator, director Kees Brouwer tries to find out whether he is merely taking advantage of the opportunity offered to investors by the food scarcity, or that, through this abstract world of financial products, he is drastically interfering in poor people’s lives.
Increasing food prices are increasingly causing unrest in the world. It was no coincidence that when the Arab Spring first began Tunisian protesters attacked the order police with baguettes. Is there just not enough food for so many people, or are the price increases caused by speculators, looking for quick profits? Backlight tries to find an answer by doing a little food speculation of its own. A quest that leads us to places including the streets of Tunisia and the Chicago Stock Exchange.

17.Oct.2012 - Anti-Science Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy, U.S. Military Prepares to Strike Libya, What They Didn't Say at the Debate, Banks Profits Increase, Global Sharing Economy, CNN Anchor Clashes with Anti-Gay Activist, Sound of Climate Science, the 1% are Manipulating Christians, Lessons About Surveillance from the Iron Curtain, FoxConn Works 14yo's as Interns, Anti-Anarchist Witch-Hunt, Food Dyes and Child Behavior

This month, we are giving away a FREE copy of The End of Faith by Sam Harris. Simply go to our Facebook page, and start sharing our posts. The person or organization that shares the most DH posts by Halloween wins the book!  

 

You are viewing this from http://www.dustcircle.com. Also, follow us on Twitter and Facebook for exclusive content.

Anti-science Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy
The United States faced down authoritarian governments on the left and right. Now it may be facing an even greater challenge from within.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy&WT.mc_id=SA_DD_20121017

US Prepares Military Strikes As Libya Crisis Deepens
The White House is considering launching drone strikes and Special Forces raids in retaliation for the fatal September 11 attacks on the US consulate and a CIA facility in Libya’s eastern city of Benghazi, the Associated Press reported Monday.
http://www.countercurrents.org/auken171012.htm

The Debate; What They Didn't Say
The reason I'm writing more these days is because I was going to lay low while I applied for my passport and then to move to Ecuador. I have decided that I'm not going to let them scare me away. I feel that it is more important to stand up for what you believe in then to slink away with my heart on my sleeve.
http://www.countercurrents.org/gatto171012.htm

Bank Profits Increase
Banks’ profit is not influenced by widespread poverty among the common persons. These firms profit while the ordinary citizens encounter hunger, unemployment, and many sorts of hardship. This makes it a “tricky” economy, an economy driven by profit motive only.
http://www.countercurrents.org/cc171012B.htm

It’s Time To Prioritise The Global Sharing Economy
There is much talk about the need for greater sharing in our societies today, in everything from household goods and peer-to-peer services to cooperative enterprises and the ‘commons’. But we often fail to acknowledge one of the most important examples of sharing in the modern world: systems of universal welfare provision.
http://www.countercurrents.org/parsons171012.htm

Selling Coke, And Catastrophe: Activism Of The Concerned Celebrities'
He used to sell Coke and charge a hefty sum for that. Now he is selling concerns and is charging an equally hefty sum for that as well. When he used to sell Coke, he did not bother much with what it was doing to the lives of people of Plachimada. Now, when he is peddling the stories of pain, he seems to be least bothered with finer nuances that shape and sustain these miseries.
http://www.countercurrents.org/samar171012.htm

A World Parliament On Its Way To Gaza
Today, off the shores of Crete, Greece, the last group came onboard the Estelle. The Freedom Flotilla Coalition tall ship, The Estelle is on its way to Gaza carrying Parliamentarians from Greece (Vangelis Diamandopoulos), Norway (Aksel Hagen), Spain (Ricardo Sixto Iglesias) and Sweden (Sven Britton); and a retired Canadian Parliamentarian (Jim Manly - see his personal message below*). On the Estelle now are citizens of Canada, Finland, Greece, Israel, Italy, Norway, Spain and Sweden.
http://www.countercurrents.org/cc171012D.htm

Israel vs. No. 2 Pencils
As countless students around the world took the SAT a week ago, Palestinians from the West Bank could not join their ranks. The October SAT exam was cancelled for students in the West Bank: The Israeli authorities held the exams sent by the College Board for weeks, not releasing the tests to AMIDEAST’s office in Ramallah.
http://www.countercurrents.org/awwad171012.htm

Press TV Ban Tantamount To Human Rights Violation
The recent EU move to take Press TV off the air is to be seen as part of a continued process of media violation against this alternative channel.
http://www.countercurrents.org/salami171012.htm

CNN Anchor Clashes with Anti-Gay Activist; Tosses Him From the Show
After he says a tolerance program is like "poisoned Halloween candy" she says, "buh-bye"
http://www.alternet.org/cnn-anchor-clashes-anti-gay-activist-tosses-him-show

The Sound of Climate Silence: Romney and Obama Spar Over Who Wants to Drill For More Fossil Fuels During Debate
Those concerned about climate change were sorely disappointed during Tuesday night’s town hall-style debate.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/sound-climate-silence-romney-and-obama-spar-over-who-wants-drill-more-fossil-fuels

How Propagandists for the 1% Are Manipulating Christian Teachings to Rob the Middle Class The neoliberal utopianism that caused the financial crisis has been repackaged for the 2012 election.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/how-propagandists-1-are-manipulating-christian-teachings-rob-middle-class

Romney: Forget Equal Pay, Ladies -- How About More Time to Cook Dinner?
A clunky answer to an easy question.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/romney-forget-equal-pay-ladies-how-about-more-time-cook-dinner

Student Loan Complaints Resemble Mortgage Woes
Some private student loan borrowers who are struggling to repay their debts are facing the same frustrations with servicers that have plagued mortgage borrowers, the U.S. consumer agency said in a report released on Tuesday.
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/340-187/14023-student-loan-complaints-resemble-mortgage-woes

Does Surveillance Affect Us Even When We Can’t Confirm We’re Being Watched? Lessons From Behind the Iron Curtain 
During the Cold War, as I argued last week, the totalitarian governments of the Soviet bloc functioned as a standing warning to Americans of the dangers of unchecked surveillance—lessons that we would do well to remember despite the fall of the Iron Curtain. As it happens, a coalition of civil liberties organizations from around the world has made a similar point in a very interesting amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court as it prepares to hear arguments two weeks from today in Amnesty et al. v. Clapper, our challenge to the FISA Amendments Act. (That legislation retroactively legalized much of the Bush administration’s unconstitutional warrantless NSA spying program.)
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/does-surveillance-affect-us-even-when-we-cant-confirm-were-being-watched

Foxconn admits employing 14 year-old ‘interns’ in China
The company, which makes products for Apple and Sony, admitted it hired the underage workers as part of an internship programme, reflecting a practice rights groups said is widespread among enterprises in China. “This is not only a violation of China’s labour law, it is also a violation of Foxconn policy,” the company said in a statement late Tuesday, referring to Chinese rules that set the legal minimum age for workers at 16.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/17/foxconn-admits-employing-14-year-old-interns-in-china

An anti-anarchist witch-hunt
Johnny Mao, Brit Schulte and Ben Silverman detail the case of three activists in the Pacific Northwest who are in jail for refusing to testify before a grand jury.

http://socialistworker.org/2012/10/17/anti-anarchist-witch-hunt

The big lie about tax cuts and jobs
Tax cuts for business have been a complete failure at creating jobs, but they serve another purpose for political leaders: creating a fiscal train wreck to justify austerity.
http://socialistworker.org/2012/10/17/the-big-lie-about-tax-cuts

Food dyes and children's behavior

Study: Spanking May Lead to Mental Illness

Shows a link between nonabusive physical punishment and several types of mental disorders later in life.

By Cindy Ok | 

Parents hold the hands of their child in Hong Kong.

Photo by Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images

Kids can cry all the way from the spank. All the way to depression, anxiety, and alcoholism.

Being spanked, slapped, pushed, or hit as a child, even when these punishments are not a part of full-scale maltreatment, are linked to an increased risk of mental illness in adulthood in a new study published in Pediatrics. Adults who reported undergoing such punishments, about 6 percent of respondents, had greater risks of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug abuse and dependence, and several personality disorders. Up to 7 percent of instances of disorders covered in the study can be attributed to harsh physical punishment in childhood.

The study finds an association between the two, but, as HealthDay points out, it does not actually prove that one causes the other. Previous studies had shown a link between physical punishment and behavioral problems, but this one wanted to study the issue removing the more severe forms of physical and sexual abuse.

Males, blacks, and those from more educated and wealthier families were most likely to report harsh physical abuse. Data was adjusted to take into account socio-demographic factors and family histories of dysfunction.

Lead author Tracie Afifi recommends that physical punishment not be used on children of any age, and that positive parenting strategies be employed instead. Spanking, and other forms of physical punishment on children, is illegal in 32 countries, not including the United States. The American Academy of Pediatrics, however, officially discourages it.

Some experts, however, took issue with the study, insisting that spanking can be an appropriate way for parents to discipline their children when applied appropriately. One psychologist tells USA Today that the study "does nothing to move beyond correlations," noting that the child's perception of why the spanking took place as well as how and why parents resort to that form of punishment in the first place should be key concerns.

Close to 80 percent of American preschool children are spanked, according to a 2010 University of North Carolina study.

• 30
• 
• 
  

Do People Get Less Religious When Societies Grow More Egalitarian?

AlterNet / By Amanda Marcotte

 2 COMMENTS

When countries embrace progressive social policy, that tends to create a decline in religious belief. Why?

 

Photo Credit: NASA Goddard

 

 

LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?

Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 

 

 

  

Slowly but surely, religion’s historical monopoly on the human mind is breaking apart. On its surface, the reason seems straightforward: the rise of secular democracy and especially of scientific understanding should encourage more people to give up on religion.

In fact, recent research from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago shows that the picture worldwide is much more complex than that. While atheism is on the rise in many places in the world, others are seeing a rise in religiosity, creating a situation where the levels of belief and non-belief vary wildly depending on culture. A lot of it has to do with history and culture, but one intriguing thread can be pulled from the picture, which is that there seems to be a strong correlation between high rates of atheism and countries that prioritize economic equality and make higher investments in a strong social safety net, such as France and the Netherlands.

Could liberal policies help create non-believers? Previous research indicates that when countries embrace progressive social policy, that tends to create a decline in religious belief. The theory, often called the “secularization thesis” is that the combination of good education of its citizens and the fact that citizens can rely on the government instead of the church for poverty relief means that more people will turn away from religion. But could the reasons go deeper than that? Few people base their choice of whether to believe in God or not on something as simple as whether they can go to the church or the state in times of need. Perhaps it’s more that economic insecurity itself increases the desire to believe in God. And if atheists want to minimize the power religion plays in society, should they start by demanding a more secure and egalitarian society?

There’s a heavy body of research showing that the more stress and uncertainty people face, the more likely they are to engage in what psychologists call “magical thinking”: superstition, prayer, belief in the supernatural. In 2008, Jennifer Whitson and Adam Galinsky published a paper in Science demonstrating that when you remove the amount of control people have over their situation, they tend to engage more in “illusory pattern perception,” which is the psychological process that creates belief in the supernatural. Other research has shown the real-world effects of this psychological tendency, showing, for instance, that people living in war zones tend to engage in more magical thinking, such as carrying lucky charms or believing in the power of prayer, than those who don’t. 

We can observe these effects in ordinary situations where people feel a lack of control. Take for instance, the sports fan who is usually a rational person but nonetheless refuses to wash his favorite jersey for fear that it will cause his team to lose. Or the usually non-superstitious person who, when playing dice in acasino, blows on the dice before rolling for good luck. When we don’t have control over outcomes, we sometimes try to regain that sense of control by imagining that we’re actually exerting control through unseen supernatural means. Religion has a lot more tradition and power behind it than everyday superstitions, but psychologically, the process can be similar. People look to supernatural means to exert control over situations they can’t influence through real-world means.

Living in a country with a poor social-safety net and high income-inequality means, for most of its citizens, living a life dogged with constant insecurity and a loss of feelings of control. People worry more about losing their jobs, and if they do lose their jobs, they worry more about becoming homeless or otherwise falling into poverty. People without guaranteed access to health care worry more about what will happen to them if they get sick. Parents in places where the education system is shoddy worry more about what’s going to happen to their kids. The less control they feel over their own destiny, the more tempting it is to conjure up a God who can save you in a society that doesn’t bother.

It’s not so much that people believe the church will come through for them in a pinch. It’s that belief in God gives them a sense of control they lack in their real-world lives.

Given these patterns, it makes sense that Russia was, along with Israel, at the top of the list of countries that had the biggest surge in religiosity in the past 20 years. A large part of that, of course, is due to the end of communism and its bans on religion, allowing people to recommit to faith. But other formerly communist nations, like the Czech Repubic and Poland, didn’t see such a surge in believers. In fact, the Czech Republic saw a surge in atheism in the past decade.

Of course, the two countries couldn’t be more different for ordinary citizens post-communism. Russia has been a swirl of political and economic distress, making it a notoriously stressful place to live. Life expectancy in Russia hovers around 68 years, about 10 years short of the standard in more stable, prosperous Western nations. The Czech Republic, on the other hand, was praised by the U.N. for its remarkably high human development index, which is a rough shorthand to measure the stability and standard of living for the average citizen of a country. Life expectancy there has reached 77 years, closing in on countries like Germany and France.

Atheists who aren’t content to simply not believe themselves, but who also want to increase the secularization of a society and the numbers of atheists, need to get behind a politically progressive agenda. Right now, the United States is seeing an explosion in income inequality, high unemployment, and ever more serious cuts to the social safety net. The inevitable result of this is more stress, and more feelings of loss of control among ordinary Americans. If they aren’t going to find safety and security in the real world, they’re going to turn their hopes to a supernatural one.

Religion’s grip on power is tightly entwined with the economic misfortunes of the people. If we want to build a more secular society, the first step is building a more equitable one.

Amanda Marcotte co-writes the blog Pandagon. She is the author of It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments.

The Psychological Culture of Christianity

Mark Fulton

[SOURCE]

“I could never feel really loved and cared for by Jesus. Intellectually I believed that he loved me, but I needed someone to hug me and tell me that I was important. If my own parents couldn’t or wouldn’t do that, why would Jesus? I wanted physical nurturing, not just some fantasy of love. But, because my parents were neglecting their children supposedly for God’s work and to save people from going to hell, how could I complain or ask for more of their time without feeling terribly guilty?”—Nick, the son of a minister

Church members are expected to buy into belief in the superstitions and dogma in the Bible, and to bow down to those propounding it. Institutional Christianity is, and always has been, a power game. Priests, pastors, and other preachers, claiming to speak with God’s authority, assume they are the main arbiters of people’s lives. They take on the role of life coaches, and many of them become intoxicated with the power that brings.

The typical church service has information going only one way, from the preacher to the congregation. The “all the answers you ever need are right here” perspective is a very rigid and flawed approach to life. To preach that week after week, as many of them do, is repressive and indicative of a cursory dismissal of people’s individuality.

Most preachers are poorly qualified for the job of a “life coach.” Bible school, or whatever its equivalent may be, is hardly a solid foundation from which to preach morality, ethics and coping skills. In fact, in my opinion, one could hardly start from a lower base.

What can “a man of God” offer people in need of help and guidance? I would say less than nothing, unless they happen to also be genuine humanists. Too often their answer to problems is to pray, to read the Bible, or to moderate worldly aspirations. They even sometimes claim that a miserable life is not such a bad thing: “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” They tell people to focus on the promise of eternal salvation, a pot of gold at the end of life’s rainbow, granted only to those special people who have faith, rather than address real problems in the here and now. They even may advise avoidance of real help from others, as they are paranoid about outsiders treading on their turf.

Most church leaders hope people behave like sheep. Sheep are subservient, easily scared, don’t cause trouble and don’t think for themselves. While these leaders are filling the sheep’s heads with mythical nonsense, they can tax their income.

Preachers portray themselves as warm, caring people, and some of them are. But too often they are egotists, people who revel in being admired and listened to. That colors any message they deliver, because the focus is not on furnishing happiness for others, but on procuring personal power, adulation and cash.

Preachers are also often hypocrites. The vaunted love said to be the hallmark of the Christian is often not to be found when they are asked for real help, particularly if people’s problems are complex and time-consuming. Most preachers, particularly those in larger churches, find it easier to tell people they will be prayed for than to help them. This is nothing more than a convenient evasion of responsibility.

Sadly, the so-called guidance people get from churches often degrades their individualism and thwarts the search for pragmatic answers. Going to church is a surefire way to not find real solutions to problems, as the personal problems of sheep get spurned. It is easier to lecture a crowd than to give a bona fide helping hand to an individual.

It facilitates crowd control to get the people groveling at the feet of the mute, divine Jesus. The master’s cold eyes stare down at them from the crucifix. The crowd fails to appreciate the obvious: that there is no point singing the praises of an obscure Jewish peasant, or in pretending he is their friend. A real friend talks, but Jesus hasn’t uttered a word for nearly two thousand years. He’s not able to tell them to stop being so stupid, because he’s dead.

Does Religion Make Us Moral?

Connor Wood

The scriptures of the world’s great religious traditions are chock-full of moral teachings. Believers are encouraged to treat each other as neighbors, to be kind to strangers, and to help the poor. But religious people aren’t always more moral or righteous than nonbelievers – indeed, religions have inspired wars, inquisitions, and seemingly endless prejudice. So is religion morally good or bad? Yale psychologist Paul Bloom thinks the answer is both. And the moral effects of religion stem from what religious people do together…not necessarily what they believe.

Paul Bloom is a noted cognitive scientist whose work has focused on morality, the development of social abilities in children, and the evolution of religion. In 2005 he published a well-received article in The Atlantic that suggested that belief in God and other supernatural spirits was the accidental by-product of cognitive predispositions to see order and purpose in the world. Bloom asserts that people basically come hardwired to sense invisible presences and spirits in their environment. So he’s not exactly a raging Bible-thumper – in fact, he’s a self-described atheist.

It might seem surprising, then, that Bloom has recently published a paper in the Annual Review of Psychology detailing, in part, all the good that religion can do. Religion, Bloom points out, does actually seem to make people more altruistic and generous. Religious people give more to charities than non-religious people, including secular charities. And IRS tax receipts show that states where people are more religious have much higher rates of charitable giving than less religious states. Meanwhile, lab experiments show that participating in religious rituals primes people to be more generous and caring toward one another.

The benefits of religion don’t stop there. Actively religious people are much more likely to say they are “very happy” with their lives than their secular counterparts, according to a 2004 study cited by Bloom. And non-religious people are proportionately more like to express that they feel like failures.

But as always – at least when it comes to religion – the positives are balanced nearly evenly by the negatives, and this is Bloom’s point. For example, religious participation also often inspires people to be prejudiced against outsiders and minorities. In a 1950s study, the psychologist Gordon Allport showed that religious people were much more prejudiced against minority groups and foreigners than non-religious people. And in perhaps the most disconcerting study cited by Bloom, a research team recently found that exposing subjects to religiously themed words actually increased their levels of prejudice against African-Americans.

So is religion good for us or not? As an atheistic scientist, Bloom’s answer is a deliciously ambiguous “yes and no.” Religion, he believes, is simply a tool. It evolved to help humans solve the “free rider” problem of communal social life. When a social group depends on the efforts of all its members for success, free riders – people who accept help and resources from the group, but don’t give much back in return – can pose a serious threat to the entire collective. This threat is especially dire for human beings, since we depend almost entirely on our social abilities to survive.

According to Bloom, that’s where religion comes in. By demanding that people participate in costly, often painful rituals, religious groups ensure that their members have a strong motivation to stay involved and contribute economic and social resources to the group. It’s a bit like investing with friends – the more money you’ve put into the shared investment, the more motivated you are to make sure that investment pays off.

This evolutionary perspective on religion helps explain one of the most perplexing findings Bloom highlights: the moral effects of religion, both good and bad, are predicted by what sorts of religious behaviors people partake in, not whether or not they believe in God or an afterlife. In fact, private religious behaviors of all kinds don’t seem to make much difference when it comes to people’s ethical actions. For instance, among Palestinian Muslims attending mosque services often was associated with support of suicide bombings against Israelis, while individual prayer had no such association.

These findings back up a growing chorus of scholars in the religious studies world who insist that religion is essentially about action, not abstract beliefs and propositions. If Bloom is right, then participating regularly in group-oriented religious activities ought to make most people more generous, happy, and altruistic…as well as more suspicious of outsiders, prejudiced, and defensive of their in-groups. Like a cancer treatment with profoundly unpleasant side effects, religion inspires the best in human nature even while it trots out the worst.

But, Bloom points out, there’s reason to be optimistic. First, the association between religion and racial prejudice has declined – at least in America – since the mid-1960s. Secondly, Allport’s research also showed that only certain kinds of religiosity seemed to inspire prejudice. Religiosity that emphasized external rewards and social acceptance was associated with negative feelings toward members of other races, while religiousness that was focused on internal, subjective goals wasn’t.

The relationship between morality and religion is a difficult one. Calvinist Christian theologians like Karl Barth have argued that human morality has nothing to do with God’s sense of right and wrong, and that salvation can only come from God’s inscrutable decision. And, as other writers have pointed out, profound religious or mystical experiences often seem to blur the lines between good and evil, making the basic nature of the universe seem neither good nor bad. Meanwhile, figures such as the 16th-century Spanish nun Teresa of Avila make the opposite claim:

A single [religious experience] may be sufficient to abolish at a stroke certain imperfections of which the soul during its whole life had vainly tried to rid itself, and to leave it adorned with virtues and loaded with supernatural gifts. A single one of these intoxicating consolations may reward it for all the labors undergone in its life.

One thing is for sure: religions certainly play a major role in how people think about morality. In fact, religion undergirds such a vast portion of human society that it’s difficult to even imagine how we’d formulate our questions about ethics outside of religious frameworks. (Even modern secular cultures are still deeply informed by Christian language and themes.) Thorny questions like the relationship of religion and morality do accomplish one thing, though: they show that we need to understand religion if we want to understand ourselves, including our moral behavior. Bloom’s most important message, then, is not that religion is good, bad, or deluded. It’s that it would be, in Bloom’s words, “impossible to make sense of most of human existence, including law, morality, war, and culture, without some appreciation of religion and how it works.”

[SOURCE]

11

 

2

share

48

share

 

Why Anti-Israelism Is Not Anti-Semitism

Printer Friendly Version

By Kourosh ZiabariCountercurrents.org

The leaders of the Israeli regime have long been after spreading this fallacy that criticizing the actions and policies of this regime is tantamount to being anti-Jew and anti-Semite, thereby sanctioning any condemnation of their brutal and aggressive ploys by the international community.

The politicians and policy-makers in Tel Aviv have shrewdly realized that, at least in Europe, the Achilles hill of the statesmen is being accused of anti-Semitism, the reason being that because of the alleged hardships that Hitler imposed upon the Jews during the World War II, the European leaders should continue to pay ransom to the Israeli regime so as not to be charged with the blame of anti-Semitism. Why? Because Israel is the sole entity that represents the global Jewry.

For the very same reason, the European officials and even independent academicians and media personalities are extremely afraid of censuring Israel for the crimes it commits and for its grave violations of the international law. As an instance, the whole world witnessed that in the late 2008 and early 2009 the European mass media flagrantly closed their eyes to the barbaric massacre of Palestinian civilians in the besieged Gaza Strip and ignored the dreadful humanitarian crisis in the beleaguered coastal enclave with connivance and complicity. They cowardly feared that if they gave coverage to the suffering of the people of Gaza and the nightmarish days they were experiencing under the heavy cloudburst of Israel Defense Forces' attacks, they might be accused of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli bias.

The same path of duplicitous silence by the Western media was followed in the aftermath of IDF's fatal assault on the Freedom Flotilla which was heading toward the besieged Gaza Strip. Nine Turkish peace activists were killed during the attack and tens of others from different nationalities were wounded as they took action in self-defense against the Israeli belligerents. However, the mainstream media in Europe brazenly refused to give coverage to and shed a light on the incident in a conspicuous act of censorship. And this is a manifestation of the supernatural influence of the Israeli politicians and Zionist lobbies in the Western mainstream media.

The Israeli officials know well how to perform a pitiable and deplorable play and make the people around the world believe that a horrendous wave of anti-Semitic sentiment is sweeping the globe. They have systematically tried to institutionalize this belief that those who criticize them are anti-Jew and anti-Semite. They resort to rationalizations and justifications which have long been parts of Israel's propaganda tactics for attracting financial and military assistance from the West.

For example, the website of Anti-Defamation League, an extremist Zionist organization which is in charge of winning media wars on behalf of the Israeli regime says that "hostility toward Jews dates to ancient times, perhaps to the beginning of Jewish history… From the days of the Bible until the Roman Empire, Jews were criticized and sometimes punished for their efforts to remain a separate social and religious group - one that refused to adopt the values and the way of life of the non-Jewish societies in which it lived."

From this fallacious premise, they want to deduce this conclusion that international hatred toward the Israeli regime is consistent with the anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish sentiments which existed in European societies before the establishment of Israeli state.

Today, the Israeli officials point their finger of accusation at the Muslim nations such as Iran for giving rise to anti-Semitism. Iranian officials' outspoken and unequivocal condemnation of the felonies of Tel Aviv and its premeditated collective punishment of the Palestinians has provided the Israelis with a pretext for presenting themselves as an oppressed nation which has been historically harassed and molested.

However, the Israeli propaganda machinery has astutely concealed this fact criticism of Tel Aviv is not equivalent to the criticism of Jews and Jewish communities.

Here in Iran, which is unreasonably accused of spreading anti-Semitic sentiments, more than 10,000 Jews live in peace and tranquility and are entitled to every social, political and economic right that the other Iranians enjoy. Their religion is explicitly recognized in Iran's constitution. They have a representative in Iran's parliament and freely attend their religious ceremonies without being persecuted, in sharp contrast to Israel's indefensible discrimination against the Arabs and Muslims in the occupied territories, Gaza Strip and West Bank who are even deprived of observing their religious rituals and going to mosques.

The international community should be aware of the fact that the Israeli regime is not representative of the Jews and that even the Jews living in other countries are fed up with the aggressive and expansionistic policies of the Israeli regime.

Jews constitute a respectable minority in the world population and although Judaism has gone through various distortions throughout the history, the teachings of Islam prohibit the Muslims from prosecuting Jews or the members of other religious minorities, inviting the true believers to behave with the followers of other religions in a compromising and tolerant way. The claim that Israel is a Jewish state is a big lie. Maybe it can be said the majority of people living in the lands Israel occupies are Jews, but the claim that Israel is a Jewish state is completely erroneous and untrue, because Judaism never allows its followers to kill innocent people, occupy their land, confiscate their belonging and properties and destroy their homes.

In a statement to his companions and comrades, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) once said, "Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I will complain against this person on the Day of Judgment."

Neither Iranians nor the people of other Muslim nations nor those Westerners who dare criticize the bloodthirsty officials of the Israeli regime for their frequent wrongdoings and crimes are anti-Jew or anti-Semite. They are simply anti-Israeli. Believe me: anti-Israelism is not anti-Semitism.

Kourosh Ziabari is an Iranian journalist

Do People Follow the Ten Commandments? Behavior and Beliefs Often Don't Match

Do People Follow the Ten Commandments?
Behavior and Beliefs Often Don't Match

By Austin Cline, About.com Guide
[REPRINT]

There are lots of debates over the cultural and political status of the Ten Commandments, but in all of those debates there is a common assumption that devout religious people are already following them and everyone else should start. Is it true, however, that religious people currently follow the Ten Commandments with any degree of consistency?

Jews presumably do a fair job at trying to follow their Decalogue, but it’s Christians — and conservative evangelicals in particular — who do the most to promote these laws in civil society, so perhaps we should focus on them. When we do, we find something interesting: not only do they not consistently follow the commandments, but in fact a couple are broken so regularly and casually that it doesn’t even appear as though anyone really tries.

The second commandment, at least according to Protestants, is a prohibition against “any graven image, or any likeness of any thing.“ The more literally one reads this, the more that would have to be forbidden: crosses, crucifixes, statues of Jesus, status of saints, icons of any sort, even photographs and realistic paintings. Muslims adhere to such a rule strictly, and as a consequence, artistic decoration consists of abstract design rather than the human figures that one typically sees in many churches.

Most Christians today, if they accept this commandment at all (it’s not included on Catholic lists), don’t interpret it literally. At most they read it to mean that one shouldn’t make any idols designed to represent God (although statues of Jesus, who is also God, are somehow exempt from even this most mildest of readings). Once we allow this commandment to be interpreted mildly or metaphorically, however, what’s to stop us from doing the same with the others? Should the commands not to kill or steal be read metaphorically?

Even more significant is the breaking of the Sabbath. The Ten Commandments require that people work for six days and then rest on the seventh, which is Saturday. This is what Jews and some small Christian groups do. Almost all contemporary Christian denominations have placed their sabbath on a Sunday, however, which is the first day of the week.

This might not seem like such a huge issue — after all, Christians are still working six days and resting one, which is one of the points of this commandment. Another point of the commandment, however, is to commemorate God who worked six days and rested on the seventh; Christians who don’t rest on the final day of the week are quite simply getting things backwards. God certainly didn’t start off the grand task of creating the universe by taking a coffee break.

Furthermore, Christians today don’t adhere to the prohibition on working as strictly as orthodox Jews. Christian may go to church services and they may not go to the office, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t work. On the contrary, most do quite a bit of work on their sabbath: yard work, house work, school work, etc. Very few Christians actually refrain from any work whatsoever, and I doubt that you will find many who go to the same lengths as orthodox Jews who refuse to drive, turn on lights, light stoves, etc.

Suggested Reading

* Ten Commandments: Introduction
* Ten Commandments: Analysis
* Ten Commandments: Different Versions

Christians: Do You REALLY Follow Jesus??

By Squirrel
[REPRINT]

Christians always tell me that Jesus is Lord, and they follow Jesus. Jesus is their Saviour, and his words are the words of life. They also claim that the bible contains these words of life. But one has to ask after reading the "words of life" whether or not Christians actually follow Jesus` teachings, or just the parts they like. Do they follow the standard that they claim is THE standard in which all of us should live by? Let us see...

I will list a few bits of scripture and let you decide whether or not they follow Jesus gentle reader. You may be surprised to find out that Christians only say they follow Jesus, just empty lip service to make themselves appear god like.

The first verse we will look at Matthew 19:21, in simple straightforward language the supposed words of Jesus is recorded for us to live our life by.

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said to him, `If thou dost will to be perfect, go away, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, follow me.'

Do Christians do this? Not in the least, in fact Christians seem to be attached to material things more so than you would imagine. One has only to look at a church parking lot on Sunday morning and see all the Christians leaving the service all gussied up in their fancy clothes and nice cars. When confronted with this verse (and I have done this) they almost always claim that the verse really means that material possessions should not be more important to us than Jesus. The rich man was attached to his possessions, and thus, Jesus told him what he must do knowing that the rich man loved his possessions more. The problem we have here, gentle reader, is that the bible says something different in the above passage than what the Christians would have us believe. Strange is it not? Another problem I see here is that IF Jesus was telling this man what HE must do, then salvation would be different for us all, or at least the means of obtaining salvation. But Christians again claim that this is not so. But it cannot be both ways can it?

When we read the next few sets of verses, it becomes more apparent that the selling of all we have and giving it to the poor IS the norm in order to follow Jesus:

Luke 12:33 Sell what ye have, and give alms: provide yourselves bags, which become not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. 34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Hmm, interesting. The treasure should be laid in heaven, and not to be worried about here on earth. Do you know of any Christian that does this? I don't, and neither do any Christians, since these verses obviously mean something different to them than what is written. The next verse says it all again in plain English:

Luke 14:33 So likewise, whoever he is of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

Okay, here he is talking to the disciples and what they must do to follow Jesus. Plain simple language direct and to the point, there is nothing to mistake here. GIVE IT AWAY AND FOLLOW ME. Do you know of any Christians that do this? I know, the question is redundant, but it drives the point home even furthe Christians do NOT obey Jesus. Yet we should model our life around Jesus. Follow his example.

Another set of verses, which shows a teaching of Jesus, is the following:

Matthew 19:16 And behold, one came and said to him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said to him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith to him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

Yet again, simple plain, and direct: no need for grace, no need for salvation, no need for a sacrifice for our sins. Funny thing is Christians disregard this as well. Using Paul and his teachings, we are told how to obtain salvation… but the salvation obtained by Paul and his ways are not those taught by Jesus.

Here we see yet another teaching of Jesus, read this one and you tell me if Christians do as Jesus tells them:

Luke 14:12 Then said he also to him that invited him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also invite thee again, and a recompense be made thee.
13 But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, and the blind:
14 And thou shalt be blessed: for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

Let's be honest now, how many Christians actually do this? I know there are specialized services for this kind of thing, but Jesus told his FOLLOWERS to do these things. This is a teaching of Jesus, an ignored one.

The next set of verses we shall read shows once again how Christians pick and choose the teachings of Jesus they follow:

Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
39 But I say to you, That ye resist not evil: but whoever shall strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.
41 And whoever shall constrain thee to go one mile, go with him two.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee, turn not thou away.

How many Christians do you see actually doing these things? Seriously, how many people actually turn the other cheek? As much as the believer would have us think that he is indeed a true Christian, will they actually follow this one? How about giving things to people when they ask for them? Ask a true Christian for 100 Dollars.

Also, if I took a Christian to court and was awarded their car, do you think they would give their house as well? Or at least their other car I mean a true Christian should not worry about menial things like transportation, Jesus will make it all better.

When we read other teachings from the bible we have to ask ourselves once again, "Do we REALLY follow the Lord?" If the bible is a perfect work, and a guide for our lives in the absolute way Christians would have us believe, then why don't Christians follow their Lord and his perfect book? In the following verse we read :

1 Corithians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted to them to speak: but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Now, how many Christians actually follow this? I know of none to be honest. I have been to churches where there have been female pastors, deacons, youth leaders, and more. But according to the bible, they should not be doing these things, as the Lord forbids it. Plain and simple, they are not true Christians. The next set of verses say the same thing… women are to be silent, and have nothing to teach men.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Now, how many Christians adhere to this teaching? This does nothing but degrade women, and basically lay the blame for everything upon Eve and all women, a sick way to justify keeping them as second-class human beings. This is one of the teachings that helped de-convert me.

There are other verses that further degrade women, but I feel that we have examined enough to show with out a doubt, that Christians do NOT follow Jesus and fortunately, they don't follow Paul either. Regardless of the empty lip service preachers, and simple believers alike, heap upon the bible and their Jesus, it is known FACT that Christians do not follow Jesus. Christians don't follow Jesus, this I know, for the bible tells me so.