I've been writing in this blog for more than 2 years. At lot has happened in that time. Thankfully I'm almost done with my degree, and then I can finally leave behind BYU with the accompanying rut I've dug myself into.
Still, I don't know that things are clearer now than they were, then. Life still seems without meaning much of the time, an unwanted burden thrust upon me be either an uncaring universe or some perversely-cruel "supreme being."
I don't think there's a higher intelligence responsible for everything, but far be it from me to claim any more than that. I know almost nothing, and I dare say I'm smarter than the average bear. I don't find comfort in even the remote possibility that there is a god, though... if there is, he's the wanker who decided to bestow consciousness on the chunk of dirt that happens to be me. Who knows what else this diabolical monster is capable of? Making me continue to live after death, perhaps!? Perish the thought.
I am reminded of Tantalus... the poor sucker from Greek mythology who angered the gods and was therefore trapped forever in a pond with luscious fruit hanging on branches above him, only to have the fruit or water withdraw beyond his reach every time he went for either one. Human beings are given inquisitive minds capable of asking deeply abstract questions about our own existence, then the answers to said questions are always apparently just out of reach. Even religion doesn't have answers, it only promises more later. Case in point, how many times in Sunday School have you asked a question and been told that maybe we'll have to wait until the Celestial Kingdom to know about that?
So, I know I sound like I'm super-depressed. And yeah, I am. But it occurs to me over and over... does that make anything I say less valid?
People imply that my view and conclusions are affected by my depression, and therefore are wrong. Now, the first one I'll give them, they are. But the second?
For all we know, optimism or happiness are results of a healthy human mind drugging itself enough to ignore the void of meaning and impending ruin and decay that loom over them all the time.
Doesn't that sound like something that might evolve in a keenly self-aware species?
What if those with depression see the world as it is, and a healthy mind is the mind more deluded? What then? Which would you rather have???
This isn't even red/blue pill, because in The Matrix there was a tiny bit of hope that outside the matrix there was still something to work for. What if knowing is accepting that there never was and never will be meaning? Which would you choose?
Happiness or awareness?
Without awareness, what are you? A rat with its pleasure centers wired to a machine, oblivious of that actual logic behind its ecstasy?
With awareness, what are you? A mind trapped in a fleshy little jar, able to see just long enough to glimpse the universe slowly devouring itself with entropy, where good and evil end up rusted together in a pile of dust with no one to even observe it?
No wonder there are lots of people out there who claim to have the answers, and even more people who flock to them at any expense.
Damn those charlatans, though. Damn them for promising answers and then telling cute stories to distract from the fact that they have none!!!
Sometimes I don't feel like there is an adequate way to express the rage I feel at this, our beloved human condition. It makes me wish I could believe in a creator, so I could then try to find a way to get revenge on him/her/it.
Heh, so basically, I wish for a living god just so I can go kill him. Maybe I'm just insane after all.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Skepticism
I need to get a rant off my chest: I used to love the History channel. I watched it whenever I stayed home sick from school. Yeah, yeah, I'm a nerd, I know.
Now... the stuff they show on there! It's sad!
What used to be a channel where I was sure to find something like "The Sinking of the Bismark!" is now a non-stop parade of shit like "Why Aliens Built the Pyramids!!!"
Aliens built the pyramids? Really?
I am all for considering every viable option, but this one seems to need a bare minimum of consideration before it's up for complete rejection.
The whole argument seems to go as follows:
1. The pyramids are big and huge and awesome.
2. It would have been tricky for ancient people to build things that we think are big and huge and awesome.
3. Therefore, aliens!
The first thing I would like to point out is that the pyramids, and yes, Stonehenge and the Easter Island heads too, are not that incredible in composition or form. I mean, the pyramids were made out of mud. Mud! And they are nice geometric forms, yes, but pretty simple ones.
Sure, they would have been hard to build, but I think some people underestimate the potential of megalomaniac kings unafraid to bankrupt their kingdoms in order to erect some monument to themselves.
So, if we go with the alien explanation, aliens came and did what? Decided to impress future generations of humans by building some big monument?
And they decide, instead of building some giant monolith covered in their strange writing, made of space-age ceramics or something of a nature we can't reproduce, hovering 200 feet in the air.... they build some angular piles of dirt?
...a circle of rocks?
...a big, handsome head carved out of a stone?
If these aliens have crossed interstellar distances to get to Earth and build big stuff to mess with our heads, seems like they could have built some more impressive stuff. We could right now!
Furthermore, it seems like a real slap at our ancestors to say "the rocks from Stonehenge originated really far away from the site! there's no way our ancestors could have moved them, because they were too dumb!"
Just because we don't have ready solutions of how to move lots of big rocks with bronze-age technology doesn't mean they didn't come up with something.
So basically, I'm angry that the History Channel spends all its time on either reality shows about foul-mouthed people operating heavy machinery or an utter horseshit interpretation of history.
Now... the stuff they show on there! It's sad!
What used to be a channel where I was sure to find something like "The Sinking of the Bismark!" is now a non-stop parade of shit like "Why Aliens Built the Pyramids!!!"
Aliens built the pyramids? Really?
I am all for considering every viable option, but this one seems to need a bare minimum of consideration before it's up for complete rejection.
The whole argument seems to go as follows:
1. The pyramids are big and huge and awesome.
2. It would have been tricky for ancient people to build things that we think are big and huge and awesome.
3. Therefore, aliens!
The first thing I would like to point out is that the pyramids, and yes, Stonehenge and the Easter Island heads too, are not that incredible in composition or form. I mean, the pyramids were made out of mud. Mud! And they are nice geometric forms, yes, but pretty simple ones.
Sure, they would have been hard to build, but I think some people underestimate the potential of megalomaniac kings unafraid to bankrupt their kingdoms in order to erect some monument to themselves.
So, if we go with the alien explanation, aliens came and did what? Decided to impress future generations of humans by building some big monument?
And they decide, instead of building some giant monolith covered in their strange writing, made of space-age ceramics or something of a nature we can't reproduce, hovering 200 feet in the air.... they build some angular piles of dirt?
...a circle of rocks?
...a big, handsome head carved out of a stone?
If these aliens have crossed interstellar distances to get to Earth and build big stuff to mess with our heads, seems like they could have built some more impressive stuff. We could right now!
Furthermore, it seems like a real slap at our ancestors to say "the rocks from Stonehenge originated really far away from the site! there's no way our ancestors could have moved them, because they were too dumb!"
Just because we don't have ready solutions of how to move lots of big rocks with bronze-age technology doesn't mean they didn't come up with something.
So basically, I'm angry that the History Channel spends all its time on either reality shows about foul-mouthed people operating heavy machinery or an utter horseshit interpretation of history.
Monday, April 30, 2012
The Messiah
In the LDS church, as in all (that I know of) the Christian world, Jesus is acknowledged as the Messiah prophesied in Jewish scripture. That's what "Christ," means, actually, it's just the Greek form.
Why didn't the Jews accept their Messiah? Well, goes the LDS interpretation, they became so hung up on certain things they hoped for in their temporal lives that they failed to recognize the real mission of the Messiah (the Atonement).
The Jews hoped for the Messiah who would liberate them from Rome and all other captors, but Jesus did not do this. The LDS theology attributes this to their undue concern for their well-being as a nation. They missed their chance because they wanted their Messiah to come solve all of their worldly problems.
Fast-forward a couple thousand years. The LDS church anxiously awaits the return of Jesus, who will kill all the sinners, clean up the Earth, and create an authoritarian system of government based on absolute truth that rules over an ecstatic utopia for 1000 years.
Time out!! Isn't this almost exactly the thing the Jews were waiting for from their Messiah? The thing for which the modern LDS church condemns them?!
Frankly, this seems a bit hypocritical to me.
"The Jews were wrong to want their Messiah to save them temporally. Meanwhile, Jesus is coming to show the world we were right all along and solve all our problems, yay!"
Why didn't the Jews accept their Messiah? Well, goes the LDS interpretation, they became so hung up on certain things they hoped for in their temporal lives that they failed to recognize the real mission of the Messiah (the Atonement).
The Jews hoped for the Messiah who would liberate them from Rome and all other captors, but Jesus did not do this. The LDS theology attributes this to their undue concern for their well-being as a nation. They missed their chance because they wanted their Messiah to come solve all of their worldly problems.
Fast-forward a couple thousand years. The LDS church anxiously awaits the return of Jesus, who will kill all the sinners, clean up the Earth, and create an authoritarian system of government based on absolute truth that rules over an ecstatic utopia for 1000 years.
Time out!! Isn't this almost exactly the thing the Jews were waiting for from their Messiah? The thing for which the modern LDS church condemns them?!
Frankly, this seems a bit hypocritical to me.
"The Jews were wrong to want their Messiah to save them temporally. Meanwhile, Jesus is coming to show the world we were right all along and solve all our problems, yay!"
Sunday, April 1, 2012
An Explosion in a Print Shop -or- Elder Nelson sets the Church back 100 years intellectually
I'm starting this post before the silly talk has even ended, but I'm ticked.
So far, General Conference (or General Nonsense, whichever you prefer) had been relatively benign in my eyes, many of the talks even surprisingly pleasant and accepting. And then this!
In his talk on gratitude, Elder Nelson ridicules those who assume life began as the result of "a Big Bang somewhere!" He suggests that this scenario is analogous to an explosion in a print shop producing a dictionary.
His basic argument is that the human body is amazing (I agree with this), and so cannot have arisen without design (but not this). Even if it had, our healing capacities would never allow us to die, but mercifully (!), God invented aging to kill us off so we could begin our eternal lives.
Where do I begin?!
First off, I won't go into detail about the watchmaker argument, which I've covered before in both qualitative and quantitative examination, but it's a load of hokum. Okay, yeah, life is amazing. But to suggest that it had to be designed denies the elegance and beauty of the theories on the origins of life that have developed so magnificently from Charles Darwin's first innocent suggestion that the diversity of life might have something to do with inheritance and selection. There is a whole century of scientific progress that tackles one puzzle after another in evolutionary biology. Sure, not all the answers are yet available. But for Elder Nelson to demean all of the best truth-seeking work mankind has done with an offhand comment simplifying centuries of scientific progress to a poorly-conceived metaphor about a print shop and a dictionary is infuriating.
Without comment like this, faith and rational inquiry could coexist. But no, Elder I'm-A-Heart-Surgeon-So-I-Can-Comment-On-Cosmology Nelson couldn't keep his trap shut, so now the intellectual potential of millions of faithful LDS individuals has been stunted to a level found among subsistence farmers in the 1800s!
Why must leaders in the church do this?!
Now, on to aging: WHAT?!
So... a slow decline in physical and mental facilities, culminating in the loss of independence and, ultimately, the death of every human being is a divine gift?
This is not much better than regarding disease as God's wrath, and therefore rejecting treatment.
Never mind that there are plenty of biological reasons aging happens, not least of which is the fact that a limited life-span is actually an evolved characteristic maximizing the survival of the genes of an organism.
Aging as a gift is like... 9/11 as a gift! Who are we, the Westboro Baptist Church?
Elder Nelson is an educated man, an accomplished doctor, leader, and orator. Despite this, he has decided (in his talk on gratitude!) to ridicule the educational establishment and its most carefully-crafted ideas and theories, essentially stabbing the very organization that has helped him to success in the back.
That, my friends, is ingratitude.
So far, General Conference (or General Nonsense, whichever you prefer) had been relatively benign in my eyes, many of the talks even surprisingly pleasant and accepting. And then this!
In his talk on gratitude, Elder Nelson ridicules those who assume life began as the result of "a Big Bang somewhere!" He suggests that this scenario is analogous to an explosion in a print shop producing a dictionary.
His basic argument is that the human body is amazing (I agree with this), and so cannot have arisen without design (but not this). Even if it had, our healing capacities would never allow us to die, but mercifully (!), God invented aging to kill us off so we could begin our eternal lives.
Where do I begin?!
First off, I won't go into detail about the watchmaker argument, which I've covered before in both qualitative and quantitative examination, but it's a load of hokum. Okay, yeah, life is amazing. But to suggest that it had to be designed denies the elegance and beauty of the theories on the origins of life that have developed so magnificently from Charles Darwin's first innocent suggestion that the diversity of life might have something to do with inheritance and selection. There is a whole century of scientific progress that tackles one puzzle after another in evolutionary biology. Sure, not all the answers are yet available. But for Elder Nelson to demean all of the best truth-seeking work mankind has done with an offhand comment simplifying centuries of scientific progress to a poorly-conceived metaphor about a print shop and a dictionary is infuriating.
Without comment like this, faith and rational inquiry could coexist. But no, Elder I'm-A-Heart-Surgeon-So-I-Can-Comment-On-Cosmology Nelson couldn't keep his trap shut, so now the intellectual potential of millions of faithful LDS individuals has been stunted to a level found among subsistence farmers in the 1800s!
Why must leaders in the church do this?!
Now, on to aging: WHAT?!
So... a slow decline in physical and mental facilities, culminating in the loss of independence and, ultimately, the death of every human being is a divine gift?
This is not much better than regarding disease as God's wrath, and therefore rejecting treatment.
Never mind that there are plenty of biological reasons aging happens, not least of which is the fact that a limited life-span is actually an evolved characteristic maximizing the survival of the genes of an organism.
Aging as a gift is like... 9/11 as a gift! Who are we, the Westboro Baptist Church?
Elder Nelson is an educated man, an accomplished doctor, leader, and orator. Despite this, he has decided (in his talk on gratitude!) to ridicule the educational establishment and its most carefully-crafted ideas and theories, essentially stabbing the very organization that has helped him to success in the back.
That, my friends, is ingratitude.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Is the LDS Church a Cult?
The short answer: No
I know many of my good friends would disagree with me, but I don't think that the church (in its current form) lives up to the brainwashed compound stockpiling weapons, mass suicide sort of image that "cult" carries with it. In most respects, the behavior of the church is no more nefarious than any (other?) Christian denomination. Church members are entitled to their own opinions, and can even criticize church leaders a little bit (not super-publicly, mind you) without being punished. The authority figures aren't even that charismatic. (some will disagree with this, and I ask them... have you SEEN General Conference?! It's about as emotionally rousing as a bunch of old paper bags blowing around the parking lot.)
That being said, I think the early church was definitely a cult of the most bright-kool-aid colored variety. Charismatic central figure? Check. Strange and erratic church doctrine and mandates? Check. Blowing up stuff they didn't like? Check.
No real mass suicides that I know of, but that might be because Joe Smith died young.
Is the LDS Church a cult?
The long answer: Yes.
Frankly, I think that the basic attributes of a cult are shared by all organized sects, Christian or otherwise. The same we-are-special us-vs-them mentality, the strange obsession with running the lives of others, the willingness to, nay, obsession with denying rational inquiry and appeal to facts in favor of embracing implausible truth-claims...
Most people stay in because they are already in, frankly.
So, when other religions call the LDS Church a cult, I say they are wrong to do so. Or at least it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. But frankly, a cult is nothing more than a religious organization, and the negative connotation of the word comes from, well, the crazy things fundamentalists of all persuasions do in the name of their beliefs.
I know many of my good friends would disagree with me, but I don't think that the church (in its current form) lives up to the brainwashed compound stockpiling weapons, mass suicide sort of image that "cult" carries with it. In most respects, the behavior of the church is no more nefarious than any (other?) Christian denomination. Church members are entitled to their own opinions, and can even criticize church leaders a little bit (not super-publicly, mind you) without being punished. The authority figures aren't even that charismatic. (some will disagree with this, and I ask them... have you SEEN General Conference?! It's about as emotionally rousing as a bunch of old paper bags blowing around the parking lot.)
That being said, I think the early church was definitely a cult of the most bright-kool-aid colored variety. Charismatic central figure? Check. Strange and erratic church doctrine and mandates? Check. Blowing up stuff they didn't like? Check.
No real mass suicides that I know of, but that might be because Joe Smith died young.
Is the LDS Church a cult?
The long answer: Yes.
Frankly, I think that the basic attributes of a cult are shared by all organized sects, Christian or otherwise. The same we-are-special us-vs-them mentality, the strange obsession with running the lives of others, the willingness to, nay, obsession with denying rational inquiry and appeal to facts in favor of embracing implausible truth-claims...
Most people stay in because they are already in, frankly.
So, when other religions call the LDS Church a cult, I say they are wrong to do so. Or at least it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. But frankly, a cult is nothing more than a religious organization, and the negative connotation of the word comes from, well, the crazy things fundamentalists of all persuasions do in the name of their beliefs.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
ATTN: God
Dear God,
I'm still upset with you for creating me without my permission, but I suppose I should let bygones be bygones.
Anyway, I thought I'd let you know that I like what you've done with the universe in general; it's a very pretty and interesting place in most regards.
That being said, I wish you'd tell your followers to stop being dicks. I mean, lots of them are nice people, but lots of others do mean things in your name. Can't you publicly express your disapproval or something? A press release or something? I mean, the McDonald's corporation would do it in your circumstances, and I'd think that your public image would be a little more important than theirs.
Anyway, the human condition still sucks and I still don't buy your excuses trying to shove the blame off on free will or Satan or any of that. Also, Jesus has been "about to come back" for a couple thousand years now, and lots of folks are starting to doubt your priorities. It's all fine and good for you to want to screw up the U.S. educational system through due political process, but if you can't get your kid out the door on time you might want to focus on such immediate concerns first.
All in all, it's getting more and more difficult for anyone to believe what you say, what with the broken promises and constant flip-flopping, not to mention your constant refusal to comment through any means other than various nutjobs who make mutually-exclusive claims. I know you're master of the universe and everything, but that doesn't mean you can completely neglect PR.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen of the Universe
P.S. I'm still willing to believe in you if you decide to answer any of all those prayers, but the answer had better be distinguishable from placebo, wishful thinking, or coincidence. My standards really aren't that high, I'm only insisting on credible confirmation, not a magic backwoods light-show or angel Moroni in a towel or anything.
I'm still upset with you for creating me without my permission, but I suppose I should let bygones be bygones.
Anyway, I thought I'd let you know that I like what you've done with the universe in general; it's a very pretty and interesting place in most regards.
That being said, I wish you'd tell your followers to stop being dicks. I mean, lots of them are nice people, but lots of others do mean things in your name. Can't you publicly express your disapproval or something? A press release or something? I mean, the McDonald's corporation would do it in your circumstances, and I'd think that your public image would be a little more important than theirs.
Anyway, the human condition still sucks and I still don't buy your excuses trying to shove the blame off on free will or Satan or any of that. Also, Jesus has been "about to come back" for a couple thousand years now, and lots of folks are starting to doubt your priorities. It's all fine and good for you to want to screw up the U.S. educational system through due political process, but if you can't get your kid out the door on time you might want to focus on such immediate concerns first.
All in all, it's getting more and more difficult for anyone to believe what you say, what with the broken promises and constant flip-flopping, not to mention your constant refusal to comment through any means other than various nutjobs who make mutually-exclusive claims. I know you're master of the universe and everything, but that doesn't mean you can completely neglect PR.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen of the Universe
P.S. I'm still willing to believe in you if you decide to answer any of all those prayers, but the answer had better be distinguishable from placebo, wishful thinking, or coincidence. My standards really aren't that high, I'm only insisting on credible confirmation, not a magic backwoods light-show or angel Moroni in a towel or anything.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
To The Lies
Promises of Hope = Lies and Fiction
Remember in "It's a Wonderful Life," how when Mr. Smalltowny Stewart is about to chuck himself over a bridge because Mr. Nasty Wheelchair has finally beat him, but then Mr. Incompetent Angel stops him (well, kind of)?
He is then shown how much different things would be without him (mostly everyone would by whores or librarians, apparently). Then, he goes home to find that all his troubles have magically gone away and he's richer than rich and Nasty McWheelchair will die alone and unfulfilled after all!! Hooray!
The point is, the movie promises that when things are at their lowest, wait a moment before hurling yourself into the river: things are sure to get better any moment.
This. Is. A. Lie.
Things might be about to get very much worse. In fact, things could never get better again. There is no promise in reality that all bad things will get better that is not a lie.
So to all the inspiring stories out there, the promises that it's darkest just before dawn, that things have to get better: go fuck yourselves, you damned pack of lies.
Remember in "It's a Wonderful Life," how when Mr. Smalltowny Stewart is about to chuck himself over a bridge because Mr. Nasty Wheelchair has finally beat him, but then Mr. Incompetent Angel stops him (well, kind of)?
He is then shown how much different things would be without him (mostly everyone would by whores or librarians, apparently). Then, he goes home to find that all his troubles have magically gone away and he's richer than rich and Nasty McWheelchair will die alone and unfulfilled after all!! Hooray!
The point is, the movie promises that when things are at their lowest, wait a moment before hurling yourself into the river: things are sure to get better any moment.
This. Is. A. Lie.
Things might be about to get very much worse. In fact, things could never get better again. There is no promise in reality that all bad things will get better that is not a lie.
So to all the inspiring stories out there, the promises that it's darkest just before dawn, that things have to get better: go fuck yourselves, you damned pack of lies.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Ambien ismessing with me now
I havvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv noticed something,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The tastk at hand
Forgive me, for I keep flying in and out a world where the baby's been,=,
terare voices and derectives everywhere. I ignore the desk ninja with somethinf like satisdfaction
(Note from Dave's wife: Dave took a break from writing this post to tell me how lucid he was, but that his feet are part of a national crime syndicate)
Okay, he're ss teh deal,. I took an Ambien to help me sleep. At my most lucide periods I can a little loopy, but aware of my surroundings . I get the feel that different aspcetrcs of myself split off and take on new porblesmna nd rtoubles.
Apple doesnt'' need to put teens inside the new ipad to make ti sell. honesry, giant theme partk shows are mnot so interesting to me.
We all
honor, defience, romance, curiousity
My room i s a ltiie gradjewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwbetter publish now before I lose it agaiin
The tastk at hand
Forgive me, for I keep flying in and out a world where the baby's been,=,
terare voices and derectives everywhere. I ignore the desk ninja with somethinf like satisdfaction
(Note from Dave's wife: Dave took a break from writing this post to tell me how lucid he was, but that his feet are part of a national crime syndicate)
Okay, he're ss teh deal,. I took an Ambien to help me sleep. At my most lucide periods I can a little loopy, but aware of my surroundings . I get the feel that different aspcetrcs of myself split off and take on new porblesmna nd rtoubles.
Apple doesnt'' need to put teens inside the new ipad to make ti sell. honesry, giant theme partk shows are mnot so interesting to me.
We all
honor, defience, romance, curiousity
My room i s a ltiie gradjewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwbetter publish now before I lose it agaiin
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Orson Scott Card - Fallen Author
There was a time when I couldn't get enough of Orson Scott Card's writing. I read "Ender's Game" in middle school and loved it, and read it a few more times as a teen and was fascinated by the things I'd missed the first time around. It was a masterpiece. I especially used to like his short fiction: it was raw and rough hard sci-fi. He had a talent for capturing the darkest elements of human nature and the struggle we each must personally make against them.
Through the years, though, I found I tired of Card. His new books were increasingly bland, predictable, and repetitive. I eventually gave up entirely, since if I really wanted cheap pulp-fiction sci-fi, I could find better examples elsewhere.
Fast-forward a few years. I learn that Card is involved with the National Organization for Marriage, an organization I have never liked much because of its dishonest anti-gay rhetoric. Even before I lost all faith in the LDS church, I always had issues with the church's political stance on gay marriage... I was okay with religious organizations dictating moral standards for their members, but for society as a whole...?
More recently, I had the misfortune of happening across this little bowl of tripe. Card's essay about "the hypocrites of homosexuality" is nothing we haven't all heard before. My main objections to his reasoning are his insistence that the laws of god as purveyed by the "prophets" is unchanging (when LDS church dogma has in fact evolved rapidly for the last couple of centuries), his "I'm the victim here" condemnation of his own critics, and his sleight-of-hand transition from condemning the idea that the church should accept homosexuality to condemnation of all legal recognition of rights for gays.
The first is self-explanatory: sure, the will of the prophets can't be contradicted, except when later prophets overturn "God's word" entirely. To suggest that the church never changes its mind in response to the moral progress of society as a whole is to ignore entirely the church's historical stance on race, gender, and sexual orientation. Or should we still kill anyone who marries across ethnic boundaries?
Card's defiant defense against his "satanic" critics is laughable. At the end of the article, he notes that just as he predicted, he had been unfairly labeled for his upright and honest writing as "homophobic" and other related terms. While it is true that Card never directly advocates violence or hatred toward gays, he consistently refers to their feelings in a way that dismisses them as selfish or unnatural. He even advocates kindness toward individuals, but outright animosity toward gays as a group. Poor Orson! How dare those mean old gays and their brainwashed friends attack him for his honest portrayal of their sinful lifestyle?
Finally, Card pulls a funny little trick when he transitions without warning from defending a church's right not to condone homosexual behavior (which I grudgingly accept) to insisting that government ought to condemn the same. He makes the argument that government ought to defend its citizens against such offenses as murder, and the same goes for gay marriage! I think the difference is obvious, but if it isn't, I'll point out that gay marriage does not hurt those who don't approve of it as long as they don't engage in it. You can babble all you want about churches losing their tax-exempt status if they refuse to perform such nuptials and such, but frankly I am an advocate of removing tax-exempt status for churches entirely (treat them like non-profits or something for all I care, it's just silly to give them special privileges just because they have "church" in their names). The bottom line? The LDS church need never condone gay marriage as far as I am concerned, but has no right acting as a political entity trying to ban the same at a state of federal level. The individuals in the church are free to vote as their conscience dictates, of course, and if they choose to vote for intolerance, that is their decision. That's what we have courts for -- to prevent the "moral" majority from needlessly oppressing minorities.
How did Card go from the masterpiece of Ender's Game to the pile of steaming poo that constitutes this essay? I wish I knew... How do authors so fall from grace?
One theory (purely speculative) springs to mind. I remember my father telling my young self that he suspected Card of having strong homosexual feelings himself, and of struggling with said feelings because of his LDS faith. This was simply based on my father's assessment of Card's writings.
If this was true, it all begins to make sense. Card's lifelong struggle and self-hatred due to his hidden homosexual tendencies have finally manifested themselves in his old age as hatred toward all thing to do with homosexuality. We all attack most vehemently what we hate most about ourselves. In addition, he seeks to "redeem" himself from his earlier, darker (and brilliant) writings by writing increasingly-conformist books filled with more and more tiresome apologetic viewpoints designed to ameliorate his inner Brigham Young. The tortured young author has become the self-righteous old puppet of his religion's ideology. And now he rides on the wave of fame (and maybe shame?) of his earlier self in order to disseminate his uncreative ideas about how other people's sexuality should be treated.
Mourn with me a moment, brothers and sisters, for the passing of a great author, not into a noble death, but into shameful triviality.
Through the years, though, I found I tired of Card. His new books were increasingly bland, predictable, and repetitive. I eventually gave up entirely, since if I really wanted cheap pulp-fiction sci-fi, I could find better examples elsewhere.
Fast-forward a few years. I learn that Card is involved with the National Organization for Marriage, an organization I have never liked much because of its dishonest anti-gay rhetoric. Even before I lost all faith in the LDS church, I always had issues with the church's political stance on gay marriage... I was okay with religious organizations dictating moral standards for their members, but for society as a whole...?
More recently, I had the misfortune of happening across this little bowl of tripe. Card's essay about "the hypocrites of homosexuality" is nothing we haven't all heard before. My main objections to his reasoning are his insistence that the laws of god as purveyed by the "prophets" is unchanging (when LDS church dogma has in fact evolved rapidly for the last couple of centuries), his "I'm the victim here" condemnation of his own critics, and his sleight-of-hand transition from condemning the idea that the church should accept homosexuality to condemnation of all legal recognition of rights for gays.
The first is self-explanatory: sure, the will of the prophets can't be contradicted, except when later prophets overturn "God's word" entirely. To suggest that the church never changes its mind in response to the moral progress of society as a whole is to ignore entirely the church's historical stance on race, gender, and sexual orientation. Or should we still kill anyone who marries across ethnic boundaries?
Card's defiant defense against his "satanic" critics is laughable. At the end of the article, he notes that just as he predicted, he had been unfairly labeled for his upright and honest writing as "homophobic" and other related terms. While it is true that Card never directly advocates violence or hatred toward gays, he consistently refers to their feelings in a way that dismisses them as selfish or unnatural. He even advocates kindness toward individuals, but outright animosity toward gays as a group. Poor Orson! How dare those mean old gays and their brainwashed friends attack him for his honest portrayal of their sinful lifestyle?
Finally, Card pulls a funny little trick when he transitions without warning from defending a church's right not to condone homosexual behavior (which I grudgingly accept) to insisting that government ought to condemn the same. He makes the argument that government ought to defend its citizens against such offenses as murder, and the same goes for gay marriage! I think the difference is obvious, but if it isn't, I'll point out that gay marriage does not hurt those who don't approve of it as long as they don't engage in it. You can babble all you want about churches losing their tax-exempt status if they refuse to perform such nuptials and such, but frankly I am an advocate of removing tax-exempt status for churches entirely (treat them like non-profits or something for all I care, it's just silly to give them special privileges just because they have "church" in their names). The bottom line? The LDS church need never condone gay marriage as far as I am concerned, but has no right acting as a political entity trying to ban the same at a state of federal level. The individuals in the church are free to vote as their conscience dictates, of course, and if they choose to vote for intolerance, that is their decision. That's what we have courts for -- to prevent the "moral" majority from needlessly oppressing minorities.
How did Card go from the masterpiece of Ender's Game to the pile of steaming poo that constitutes this essay? I wish I knew... How do authors so fall from grace?
One theory (purely speculative) springs to mind. I remember my father telling my young self that he suspected Card of having strong homosexual feelings himself, and of struggling with said feelings because of his LDS faith. This was simply based on my father's assessment of Card's writings.
If this was true, it all begins to make sense. Card's lifelong struggle and self-hatred due to his hidden homosexual tendencies have finally manifested themselves in his old age as hatred toward all thing to do with homosexuality. We all attack most vehemently what we hate most about ourselves. In addition, he seeks to "redeem" himself from his earlier, darker (and brilliant) writings by writing increasingly-conformist books filled with more and more tiresome apologetic viewpoints designed to ameliorate his inner Brigham Young. The tortured young author has become the self-righteous old puppet of his religion's ideology. And now he rides on the wave of fame (and maybe shame?) of his earlier self in order to disseminate his uncreative ideas about how other people's sexuality should be treated.
Mourn with me a moment, brothers and sisters, for the passing of a great author, not into a noble death, but into shameful triviality.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Spinning My Wheels
I've written several posts lately and ended up not posting them. It feels like I'm spinning my wheels as far as life is concerned... I want to change the world but find myself impotent.
I feel trapped, for the most part. My brother is getting married very soon, and my mother has been pressuring me to see if I can't get a temple recommend. I think today I'm going to call her and tell her there is no way that is going to happen.
Anyone who says the church strengthens families is full of shit. The church happily tears families apart when it suits the church's dogmas and agendas.
School blows. I need to get out of this damn place, but I keep pushing back graduation because my damned depression has sabotaged my academic performance for the last two years. I feel so fucking trapped that I entertain thoughts of offing myself every day.
I'm a wreck. I suppose I'm a disgrace to atheists, agnostics, and apostates everywhere, because I've been consistently less happy since I gave up on faith. But I'll be damned if I go back to believing contradictory statements simultaneously just to make myself feel better.
Damn the church and its lies. It's like an addiction I can't get over, that feeling of absolute truth and simple moral reality. The feeling of objective meaning. Damn them all for promising peace where there is none.
Damn them for speaking of rest where there is only death.
Damn them for teaching me to hate myself for being less-than-perfect.
Damn them for their precious "Atonement" and "Grace" and all the other righteous bullshit that they use to tell those who suffer that their pain isn't real.
And damn me for taking it all so fucking seriously that I have been no more than half of a man ever since I figured out that all of it is fantasy.
I feel trapped, for the most part. My brother is getting married very soon, and my mother has been pressuring me to see if I can't get a temple recommend. I think today I'm going to call her and tell her there is no way that is going to happen.
Anyone who says the church strengthens families is full of shit. The church happily tears families apart when it suits the church's dogmas and agendas.
School blows. I need to get out of this damn place, but I keep pushing back graduation because my damned depression has sabotaged my academic performance for the last two years. I feel so fucking trapped that I entertain thoughts of offing myself every day.
I'm a wreck. I suppose I'm a disgrace to atheists, agnostics, and apostates everywhere, because I've been consistently less happy since I gave up on faith. But I'll be damned if I go back to believing contradictory statements simultaneously just to make myself feel better.
Damn the church and its lies. It's like an addiction I can't get over, that feeling of absolute truth and simple moral reality. The feeling of objective meaning. Damn them all for promising peace where there is none.
Damn them for speaking of rest where there is only death.
Damn them for teaching me to hate myself for being less-than-perfect.
Damn them for their precious "Atonement" and "Grace" and all the other righteous bullshit that they use to tell those who suffer that their pain isn't real.
And damn me for taking it all so fucking seriously that I have been no more than half of a man ever since I figured out that all of it is fantasy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
