I’ve always considered Catholics to be, in general, slightly nuttier than their Christian brethren with their cute superstitious biscuit-chewing iconolatry and romantic Original Sin/confessional wackiness (I’ve often viewed artificial religious tangibility (Scripture documents, clothes, ceremonies, beads, positional infallibility clauses, Popemobiles, priceless artwork, millions of dollars in property, etc) as inversely proportional to philosophical credibility; the scale of which ranges from Buddhism (“A Bit Silly”) to Islamic Extremism (“Insane”)/Flat-Earth Christian Evangelism (“Just As Insane But Funny And Mostly Harmless”)), but more charming and marginally cooler as a whole (fuelled in no small part, no doubt, by The Godfather trilogy). Anyway, this is just a memo to the anonymous self-proclaimed proud Catholic who tried to put forward the argument that atheism was the height of arrogance and ignorance: think before you type. Bigoted anti-intellectualist opinions are separate from rational counter-arguments. My last retort still remains unanswered after three days, and I doubt that will change, either through stubborn ignominy or sheer confusion (I get the feeling my reliance on logic and epistemology over ad hominem rhetoric was totally lost on him). Not that I’m surprised. I’ve even had agnostics trying to use the exact same assertion on me. Really, is it that hard to figure out? If “theism” is defined as “god-belief”, the antonym of the term IS THE ANTONYM OF THE DEFINITION. So what, therefore, is the definition “a-theism”? “NO GOD-BELIEF”! THAT’S IT! For fuck’s sake man, dogs know it. Learn to master the English language, it exists for your benefit as well. If there’s one thing I’ve learned in my 21.5 years, it’s that common sense isn’t so common.
Incidentally, can the Poms be any more blatant in their overcompensation for their inferiority complex regarding their until-recently utterly barren history of sporting success? It seems to me that when you win an international sporting competition for England, it’s a call for national days of euphoric celebration and knighthoods en-masse. On the other hand, when you win an international sporting competition for Australia, it’s called DOING YOUR JOB.
Also in the news is America’s refusal to grant business contract bids to countries who ideologically opposed the invasion of Iraq in favour of companies based in the US, America, The United States, and, if there’s time, Great Britain, Australia, Italy, and the rest, which, at first glance, you’d probably expect me to get all indignant about. On the contrary, I think it’s only fair, but let’s dispense with all this self-righteous “protecting America’s security interests” bullshit. As the old adage goes, you’ve gotta be in it to win it. If you want the dividends, you’ve gotta be a shareholder. The Iraq Project was a massive monetary investment for oil companies and the governments whom they sponsored, and it’s quite reasonable to expect them to be able to be the first to capitalise on all the profits from that glorious Texas Tea won through all that blood, sweat and tears (mostly blood). And don’t keep trying to use that “Germany and France didn’t want to disturb their financial interests in Saddam-run Iraq”, because, while true, it causes my hypocrit-ometer to explode, and they’re notoriously tricky to rebuild.
*Edit* And another thing. I’m normally a picture of nonchalant frostiness, but I swear, if I hear another moronic, snippy little reference to France’s “proclivity to surrender” or “unwillingness to fight”, whether said in jest or otherwise, I’m going to fucking blow my top, because it’s the fucking HEIGHT of offensive, insulting, chauvinistic conceit. There were at least 2.2 million French military casualties in both World Wars you arrogant fucks. Build a bridge and get the fuck over yourselves.
Leave a reply to Note to Popists: don’t fuck with me (I am Ahab)