Zombie Christ is a greedy bastard

Look. I think it’s perfectly legitimate, if you’re resurrected, to adopt a new (re)birthday on the date you became one of the undead. But if you’re going to do so, as far as I’m concerned, you forfeit your original birthday.

So what’ll it be, Jesus? Christmas, or Easter? You can’t have both. I know you’re just in it for the extra presents (everyone knows that people with birthdays near Christmas get stiffed), but fucking shit — whether you came back from the dead or not in the first place (and you didn’t, because that’s impossible — but supposing you might have), you’re dead as a doornail now. Considering this, you probably don’t merit even one birthday party a year.

I really don’t think that it’s fair that your worm-eaten ass gets to inconvenience those of us that choose not to form deep personal relationships with corpses (seriously, people, that’s pretty morbid) by closing down everything but IHOP multiple times per year. All I got to do today was sit around and stew about my ruined weekend plans.

Could you bastards at least arrange to hold your borrowed pagan fertility festival on the same day each year? For those of use who aren’t Christians (or at least, for me), it’s pretty easy to lose track of the precise date, on account of it holds absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

My mind is as wide as the sky

Um, are you kidding? We’re not cannibals and you’re a foolish twit for making such an uninformed and narrow remark.

I think it’s amazing that liberals can be so narrowminded. Keep in mind that I’m a liberal please, but being nasty and snarky about people of faith simply because you don’t understand it makes you meanly judgmental and narrow. Grow up.

a) Yes, I was kidding — Catholics aren’t cannibals, because the shit about the Eucharist literally being the body and blood of Christ is literally retarded
b) I understand perfectly well
c) I’m not particularly liberal when it comes to the issue of religion — all theists are wrong
d) I’m definitely judgemental — I think that theists are pretty durn loopy indeed
e) I’m definitely narrow, as well — I dunno, I’ve just never been able to gain weight
f) F is for fail, and you do

Shitting out Jesus

If the Eucharist is literally the body and blood of Jesus, then, well…

Bleh. Whatever. Cannibals!

Related: apparently 25% of Americans (according to the AP) think that 2007 will bring the second coming of Jesus. Um. Okay, freaks.

Happy Generic Holiday Season

I know several people (including my husband) that work at Starbucks, and I’ve been told by them that the word “Christmas” is off-limits this year, and that “holidays” has been suggested to them as an alternative. Indeed, itsredagain.com, Starbucks’ holiday website, doesn’t include the C-word anywhere (except where it’s been submitted by users). The whole campaign is based around the slogan “on with the tradition”. However, they’ve slipped up. Sean brought home some food in a Starbucks paper bag, last night. The text printed on it includes the phrase “suddenly, like the flipping of a yuletide switch”. Hm. Maybe archaic synonyms for Christmas are considered acceptable? Or maybe Starbucks has decided to celebrate a pagan form of Yule this year? Starbucks, you are fail! Oh, whatever. Don’t use the word Christmas. Fine. It doesn’t make your red and greeny, holiday tree-y, Nutcrackerry, candy caney, twinkling starry, wassailingey holiday any less Jesusy. Who do you think you’re fooling, here? Is anyone about to mistake a red and green Generic Holiday for blue and white Hannukah? Diwali and Ramadan are both over. Chinese New Year isn’t until the end of January. So I’m not tricked. And I’m still terribly offended. Terribly. And I’m still going to boycott you. But only because I hate coffee. And excluding any free food friends or family might bring home from work.

Church of Scientology of Illinois

I found the local Scientology loony-bin by accident today while walking home from dropping off my rental car (oh yah — so my car is totalled and I won’t be driving again any time soon…)

And now I must find some poor sucker to attend some of their meetings with me, because I feel that it would be most entertaining. First I need to memorize all of the “correct” answers to their personality test. They show their Orientation film several times a day. For free (then once you’re hooked, they jack up the price). Let’s bring popcorn! This movie must be available for download somewhere online. Please, Xenu?

Happy Newtonmas

I do not understand all of this poo-pooing of Narnia by my fellow godless bastards. I haven’t seen the movie, and I haven’t read the books since I was a kid. But I was a precocious young atheist (thanks Bertrand Russell, Douglas Adams, George H. Smith, Erich von Daniken), and I was fully aware of the preachy Christian allegory way back then. At the time I found it mildly irritating at certain points. And I guess that, admittedly, some of the Aslan shit was semi heave-inducing (deus ex felina — I am particularly fond of this description), and I probably didn’t catch all of the apologist crapola at that age (although I do recall my bullshit detector going off often enough). But generally it wasn’t wincingly noticeable without searching for it, or terribly relevant to the plot as a whole. Vague references in fiction to other fiction… meh. Whatever. If I’m going to suspend my disbelief, I might as well suspend my tendency to hyper-criticize as well. I suppose. Save that shit up for bullshitting hardcore on university papers. All writing, especially fiction, (but especially non-fiction) embodies the bias of its author. I can overlook it, sometimes. If I’m not busy being cantankerous. And despite it all, the series remains one of only two pieces of fantasy writing that I can tolerate to any degree (the other is The Lord of the Rings). So suck it. C.S. Lewis is still the awesome.

Now. More nog! And chocolate!

If only it was this simple…

I was watching the extras on The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy DVD last night. Included is the second half of the Guide entry about Babel fish that describes how irreducible complexity proves that God doesn’t exist. The logic is just about on the level of that used by Intelligent Design morons. Actually, I take that back. It’s at least several thousand times more advanced (okay, I’m just being snarky :) Can we apply this reasoning to eyeballs or flagella as well, plz?

Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes like this: “I refuse to prove that I exist”, says God, “for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.”

“But”, says Man, “the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.”

“Oh dear”, says God, “I hadn’t thought of that,” and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

Ah, Douglas Adams… He was very much ahead of the times.

But, wait. Nevermind. Intelligent Design has nothing to do with God, religion or faith. It’s a good thing, because if they screw up one of these days and accidentally stumble upon some real facts or evidence, it would denigrate their presupposed beliefs to the level of despicable, despicable science…

[EDIT]: Okay, well. Ack. Douglas Adams was ahead of his time, and is probably also rolling in his grave. I’ve seen people quote the passage above to make fun of Intelligent Design before, but a Google search reveals that these IDiots are also using it as an allegory to demonstrate their argument (they really don’t know a joke when they see one, huh). Asshats. Hands off! You have your Good Book, and I have mine.

Also, they struggle with the very issue DNA pointed out. What is God without faith? And OMG! What would happen if Intelligent Design actually did prove God! Wouldn’t that undermine Christianity? There are more than a few people out there that think this, and if they’re going to believe something stupid anyway, I fully support this viewpoint, because at least they’ll stop bullshitting about science. Because seriously. Proof is dangerous! Belief that isn’t based on irrational superstition doesn’t count, because faith should be enough, they say. And I’m sorry, but once I’m given facts, they’re going to take precedence over everything else. Therefore, evidence for ID would prevent me from ever having faith, and probably condemn me to hell. They don’t want that, do they?

Yeah, I’m not going to read any more about this right now. I hate the “we don’t need no steenking facts” argument. This is why run away from preachy religious types. Even if you finally get them to accept that there’s no way they’re going to convince you of anything without facts to back things up, and to admit that they really don’t have any facts, they just start ranting about how you’re being stubborn and shallow to require them in the first place. And how do you argue with someone who’s essentially saying “Hi! I’m full of shit, and I’m better than you because of it!”

I have to return that DVD now, anyway.