Philippine Atheists

There is another hot item raging over the internet. This time, it’s a punchline in the highly popular TV series, Desperate Housewives. There is even an online petition demanding that ABC issue an apology and edit the show to remove the punchline in question. Demanding an apology is one but demanding that the supposedly offensive portion be removed is another. As of now, there are close to 100,000 signatures gathered already but this should give us pause. As somebody commented in Lester Cavestany’s blog about the same incident, that Pinoys are overly-reacting to this episode but not in our own home-grown racism by giving as an example a very popular comedian’s take on Indian music but nobody seems to be demanding an apology from our fellow Pinoys. At some point or another and in some context, we are all guilty of the same offense, it’s time that we look within ourselves and grow up.

Popularity: 85% [?]

Is YouTube censoring atheistic/anti-religion materials? Apparently, it deleted the account of a popular atheist Nick Gisburne when he uploaded a video targeting not Christianity but the religion of peace: Islam. The original video was allegedly deleted by the site after being tagged by other users as having “inappropriate content”. Here is the same video uploaded by another user.

Popularity: 31% [?]

In an increasing secular, technologically advanced world, there exists a bunch of archaic, bigoted group of imbecilical creatures, who are hell-bent (literally) on imposing their faiths on just about every aspect of secular life.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen. I am writing about this very unique species of homo sapiens…..the religious fundamentalists, or fundies for short.

These religious nutters come in all shapes and sizes: From the turban wearing terrorists of Osama and his merry gang, to the hatred, gay-hating morons of Pat Robertson, these religious fanatics have only one aim in mind:

To create a New World Order, whereby or other creeds and faiths are either subjugated to the point of oblivion, or at worse, annihiliated.

HOW RELIGIOUS FUNDIES STRUT THEIR STUFF

Few would imagine that, in democratic, civilized societies, people would actually feel threatened, or coerced, to limit freedom of speech in the name of respect.

Inevitably, though, conflict arises between members of secular free press and the respective religious authorities, and from time to time, such conflicts may lead to sacrilegous outrage, the likes of which may lead to calls ranging from minor restrictions to freedom of the press and speech (Think book burning), or at the extreme end of the spectrum, calling for the heads of the purported perpetrators of the perceived blasphemy.

1. THE CASE OF SALMAN RUSDIE

One of the most publicized, if not notorious, incident, involved a certain writer of Indian origin, Salman Rushdie.

In Sep 1988, publications of his controversial work, The Satanic Verses, which, amongst other things, was a direct impliance to a little-known fact of the Islamic religion, that of the three pagan goddesses, which was written, according to an Arab historican, Ibn Ishaq (Approx. A.D 700), by Muhammad and incorporated with the Islamic religion. Muhammad himself later revoked the goddesses, claiming he was under the influence of the Devil. Continue Reading »

Popularity: 16% [?]

During the Singapore General Elections of 2006, one of the major issues with regards to political coverage was the prevalence of the internet community: i.e Forummers, bloggers and an assortment of netizens, who may or may not be responsible for the ruling incumbent’s (PAP) decrease in its share of votes.

There was talk, chief of all from Straits Times (a media vehicle of Singapore Holdings), that rules and regulations existed which would imply some form of governance on political postings on the net, but fortunately for most (especially bonafide anti-PAPpies like me), we were largely left to our own devices, although I was actually approached via email for an interview, which I did not grant, to an SP reporter (For those of you who wish to know why, email me).

Inevitably, however, our conservative powers-that-be, led by some mentally-challenged minister, couldn’t find solace with that kind of freedom. You see, folks, freedom is contagious, and highly toxic, in the eyes of oppressive government. Continue Reading »

Popularity: 17% [?]

As if to insult the intelligence of all Pinoys, some Catholic bishops, Catholic groups and individuals are campaigning that the movie The Vinci Code be banned from being shown in the Philippines. The Tom Hanks’ starrer, based on a widely popular book, a work of fiction, by Dan Brown is due to be shown in local theaters starting May 18th. If we are to listen to its adversaries for the reasons why, we are given some pretty amusing reasons, some bordering on idiocy and ignorance. For example, Secretary Ermita who is yet to read the book (I haven’t read the book myself) said the story-line is blasphemous. Yes, a word still in vogue in our country in this time and age when it should have been obsoleted by the spirit of The Enlightenment. But if we are to take INQ7.net’s news story as gospel truth, Secretary Ermita used to be a member of the board of censors during the martial law era, so it is to be understood. According to the Malaya newspaper report on the same item, Secretary Ermita who know so well that DVC is a work of fiction, also said

“the film aims to confuse believers and plant seeds of doubt among those whose faith has no deep mooring.”

This is patently false since the film’s aim is simply financial profit, not to sow confusion among the believers. If Secretary Ermita should ban groups that sow confusion among those whose Catholic faith has no deep mooring, he should start banning the TV and radio programs of ADD and INC. Never mind that part of this Catholic faith is believing that a small piece of tasteless wafer can turn into the Body of Christ (warning : long article on Catholic Encyclopedia about absolute nonsense) after a few grunts from the officiating priest. If you can believe that, you can believe anything including the DVC story-line, hook line and sinker. But the tragedy of this, however absurd it may turn out to be if they will have their way, which I doubt they will anyway (thank goodness to reason) is that a few Catholics are trying to dictate based on the flimsiest of reasons what should be watched, or in this case, not watched, by the whole nation as if they speak for everybody including the non-Catholics and the nominal Catholics who cannot tell the difference between eucharist and eucalyptus but instead have undying faith in Tom Hanks. In this sense, their actions are an affront to the artistic freedom and free speech of the filmmaker, and the right of each citizen to choose which movies he/she will or will not see.

Popularity: 24% [?]

For the past few weeks, I have been covering on issues pertaining to the General Elections in my native country, Singapore (for anyone who is curious, kindly proceed to www.disgruntledsporean.blogspot.com).

Prior to this, more often than not, I have avoided writing issues about local politics, which are conspicuously absent even from my own blog. I guess, like most Singaporeans, I am guilty of being too apathetic towards politics here, partly because of the predictability and staid state of affairs of our political scene, which can be summed up in three words: “The Lee Dynasty“.

Writing about our elections has been a humbling experience for me: For once, I sincerely felt the terrible loss of our rights, literally, for what seems to be the most basic of human comforts: A home to live in, food on the table and a job to go to (if you are lucky). All these, in exchange for our political apathy and enforced meekness in the face of wanton abuse by semi-government and government entities (Check NKF fracas).

Imagine my horror, when a Christian pinoy of a particular forum, of which I am an inactive member of, wrote about the supposed “horrors” of the freedom of the press. He claims that this “freedom” has been abused by journalists, who are being bribed by unscrupulous politicians to slander their political opponents.

Now, in an open, secular society, such acts by corrupt journalists and their associating newspapers would have been exposed by worthier, decent newspapers. In any case, corruption ought to be punishable under the full weight of the law, provided, of course, a healthy, democratic nation has in place a totally unbiased judiciary, plus an enlightened people to question the powers-that-be, without fear of being sued or threatened via physical means.

This Christian further enthuses, to my complete and abject dismay:”I understand the lack of freedom of speech in Singapore; but, I tell you, millions of Filipinos will trade their freedom of speech just to have the kind of food Singaporeans serve on their dining tables. They will be willing to trade their “chewing gums” just to provide them suitable jobs.”

According to this rather naive Christian, human rights can be traded for food on the table.

Herein lies my question: Does the genetic makeup of any sane human rest on having food on the table for the rest of his/her miserable life? If so, he/she would have been better off languishing in some miserable prison.

According to the famed Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs:

Diagram of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

1. Physiological

2. Safety

3. Love/Belonging

4. Esteem

5. Actualization

Continue Reading »

Popularity: 15% [?]