Separation of Church and State

 So this is why you want separation of church and state, or perhaps Freedom FROM Religion.  I have never been drawn to religion, although the older I have grown, the greater has become my disdain for religion.  I think, as one grows old, you are pushed in one direction or the other. I can actually understand why some folks are drawn into the web of religion. Increasingly, my mind wanders to that place wherein a human breathes his last breath, and then all brain activity ceases. With religion, one can make believe that the last breath is simply a transition into the wonders of Heaven.  But logic tells me that there is no transition. That when the brain ceases, there is no more. Why would humans levitate into heaven, but peacocks, lions and elephants simply cease to be? See, it makes no sense to me, and so I reject that thought.  But also, I conclude that whether afterlife is real or fake, we discover whatever we believe.

Long ago, I came to understand that religion has nothing to do with an afterlife. Religion is all about controlling other people within this life.  Control is the sole purpose of organized religion.  Now one might conclude that humans need to be controlled, therefore it is ok for religion to be the control mechanism.  Why not religion?  Well, again, I am old, but I concluded long, long ago that religion might be the least desirable vessel of control humans have ever invented.

At least with government rules and regulations, humans invent them and humans can cancel them.  With religion, humans make believe a superhuman GOD invented the rules, and, therefore, no human is to be allowed to intervene, or change the rules in any way.  Now think on that. Man invents the concept of GOD and then insists that other humans are not allowed to mess with the GOD figure. Because GOD just IS. And then some of those same humans make believe that they are able to communicate directly with the GOD figure. So anything those humans say, or write is also unassailable. What a neat system, huh?

And so the laws of man proceed to be developed, but those laws are often not allowed to disagree with the Word of GOD. Now, the “Word of GOD” apparently depends on who is doing the interpreting. A Buddhist monk, a Hindu or Muslim priest, a Christian priest might each reach different conclusions about various subjects, and so, GOD apparently speaks differently depending on the audience.

And so, we begin to wonder about the GOD thing. Maybe, just maybe, there are only human thoughts and GOD simply isn’t there.  And were that true, then, since I am human, is not my view just as valid as the next person’s?  Well, yes it is.

And so we come to subjects like “abortion”. And what is abortion you ask? Well abortion is a medical procedure in which an early fetus is discharged from a female body before that fetus is a viable human being.  Now sometimes, that procedure occurs naturally, without any outside medical intervention. And sometimes some external intervention is necessary. But in any case, the fetus cannot survive and become a living human and is simply discharged from a woman’s body.

Pregnancy is truly one of the world’s most complex procedures, whether that pregnancy is human, or one of the thousands of other creatures on this planet. It is complex because any living creature, whether it be a human, or a tiger, or a butterfly, is amazingly complex.  But complexity should never be confused with Godliness. And this is where religion intervenes. The leaders who control their religions, and, therefore, their religious followers, endow humans with special, Godly characteristics. Humans are special because we are created in God’s image. We are linked to God.

And so, the process of pregnancy becomes interwoven with Godly motives and characteristics. Humans are not allowed to intervene so as to terminate this Godly process we call pregnancy, regardless of how that pregnancy came into being.  Whether a woman becomes pregnant through a loving relationship, or a violent rape, or perhaps an accident, those who control believe they can brush aside the concerns of the woman and dictate to the woman that she should no longer have any control over what occurs within her body.  And that is truly bizarre, but so much of religion is bizarre.

Now one thing we do know, because science has taught us much about the human body, is that this pregnancy period is fraught with complexity and it often fails to proceed adequately. And sometimes, that process ceases to be viable and self-terminates, or has to be terminated for sound medical reasons.  These situations set up the possibility for a disagreement between knowledgeable medical professionals and ignorant religious controllers. And this is precisely why the “Separation of Church and State” was devised by our forefathers. We do not and should not allow ignorant (delusional?) humans, who believe they speak to God, from intervening in procedures that demand special knowledge, i.e., medicine.  The Pope might know a lot of stuff, but he does not know much about human physiology.

But we have ignored all those little things, like actual knowledge. Instead, we have chosen to allow largely ignorant humans, like Brett Kavanaugh, or Clarence Thomas, to devise rules, or even interpret rules that intervene in procedures over which they have no knowledge.  I don’t know, would we ask Clarence Thomas, or Amy Coney Barrett to intervene in the launch of a space vehicle, to define when it would be safe to launch?  Likely not, mainly because God never told Judge Amy when, or even whether to intervene there. And yet, she has no more knowledge there than she possesses over a pregnancy.

So, there we are. Ignorant people have been given charge to decide matters of life and death, when they actually are ignorant of the details. And that is now America 2022, perhaps more like America might have been in 1622.

Somehow, we need to remove such folks from their benighted tasks. Maybe voting is the answer, although to be fair, it is no longer clear that the American people are trustworthy at this voting thing. Too many Americans have given up on thinking and knowledge, and have reverted to the pretend world of organized religion.  I guess it is easier when you don’t have to think for yourself and can allow the Pope or Judge Amy to do your thinking for you.  That way, you can always retreat to, “Didn’t happen on my watch”.

Getting Old

 It seems the older I become, the more folks around me keep croaking. I keep seeing pictures and notices in newspapers, or on TV of people whose names I know and who just croaked, and virtually all of them are younger than me.  The latest person was Mark Shields. From Wiki:

“Mark Stephen Shields (May 25, 1937 – June 18, 2022) was an American political columnist, advisor, and commentator. He worked in leadership positions for many Democratic candidates' electoral campaigns.

Shields provided weekly political analysis and commentary for the PBS NewsHour from 1988 to 2020. His on-screen counterpart from 2001 to 2020 was David Brooks of The New York Times. Previous counterparts were the late William Safire, Paul Gigot of The Wall Street Journal, and David Gergen. Shields was also a regular panelist on Inside Washington, a weekly public affairs show that was seen on both PBS and ABC until it ceased production in December 2013. Shields was moderator and panelist on CNN's Capital Gang for 17 years.”

I know, I know, folks are dying all around us, each and every day. So, what’s new?  Well, it’s not new, or even “news”. It’s just that, as noted I’m old and it seems that everyone I know is just slipping away. Happily, it’s mostly old doofuses like me.  But, more often than not, it’s someone I liked, Like Shields, one of the good guys of this world. Each time, I think, so why doesn’t Putin kick off, or even Trump, you know, some Mafia gangsta’s of the world. But no, they seem to hang around. Although, to be fair, there are at least rumors that Putin may have some disease that is life threatening. Hmmm, sounds promising.

On the whole, I feel reasonably good for a really old fool. I’m not really sure how the hell I got here. I keep thinking about playing hide and seek on 71^st Street near Second Avenue when I was 7 or 8. Yeah, I played on the streets of New York. It’s what we all did.  Here’s me by an apartment house on 72nd Street when I was about 6. See, I was young at some stage.

And we used to play in Central Park, which was only a few blocks away.

And then, we moved away, cuz my mum was afraid that my bro and I would get killed playing on the streets of Manhattan.  He did get hit by a truck one day and had to be hauled off to the hospital, and I was always doing something that required a cast or stitches.

But those were the days of World War II. And that horror story used to get reported on our radio, to which I listened even though pretty little.

And I grew up and I went off to college, and then got married, and then off to my working career in aerospace, and then, for heaven’s sake India for four years.

And then life went on until I retired and moved here to North Carolina and began aging seriously. See you don’t actually begin aging seriously until after you retire. Then, I guess it’s a mind game. When your brain begins to understand that you no longer play a serious role in the affairs of the world each day (inventing new computers, or selling coffee and donuts at the corner store, it doesn’t matter), then your brain decides it’s time to retire, so you begin “aging”.  And the aging thing continues as a mild change each year, hardly noticeable, unless someone hasn’t seen you in a while.  And at some point, I began to understand that I was now past the age of everyone in my family—grands, parents, aunts and uncles, siblings, even cousins, all disappeared into the netherworld.  Now, happily, I also began seeing stories about folks who were 10-25 years older and still truck’n on. That’s nice.

But then the aging thing began merging with the day’s politics. Trump showed up in America, and my world began changing.  And not only politics, but climate change began interfering. And I began thinking, so will climate change destroy our world, or will the Trump forces destroy America first? See, I have inadequate mental reserves to deal with crap like Trump and global climate change.  But what little I have left suspects that Trump is actually the greater threat to America and, therefore, to the ones I love.

I am having increasing difficulty even understanding what I hear and read about how Trump closed out his tenure by trying to destroy America, and how he is actually continuing on his path of destruction. He supports political candidates for various state offices, including that odd one—the Secretary of State. I never thought about that one, until I began to understand that those folks, if corrupt enough, could well change an election by screwing with the actual votes.

And the worse Trump looks from all the Congressional testimony into the January 6^th Trump insurrection efforts, the more his supporters seem to love him. Imagine, after all you have heard, that folks actually contributed $250 million into a fake Trump political fund. Really??? You are that stupid??? And the answer is, YES, they are that stupid.

And now I find myself day-dreaming about what I would do were I 30 again.  And my answer? Well, it’s simple, I would migrate somewhere, maybe New Zealand—they seem to have an intelligent ethical political leader. Course, so does Canada, but I’m not sure Canada would welcome Americans. How smart are we, after all? We elected Donald Trump—think 1936 Germany. But I’m not 30 again. And so, I am not migrating anywhere—and the world breathes a sigh of relief.

But I await each day with some trepidation. What will republicans do today in their quest to destroy America? And I used to think Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon were awful. By comparison, they were saints, although Reagan may have been the one who let all the crazies out of their closets.  Who knows?? The Shadow knows!

And so, each day keeps arriving, and I keep getting older, and Trump keeps getting worse, and our American system of governance seems more at risk. My answer to all such problems is to let the people VOTE.  But now, with the crazed Trumpies out there, I am no longer sure.  Still, please, all you civilized Americans, do go out and VOTE when it is your turn. We will still hope for the best, and who knows, maybe I will still be here to observe the outcome.

Gods and Aging

 As I continue to age, increasingly I wonder about what life might have been like, had I lived these many 87 years in a land that was free of religion.  Each day, we greet our two cats with love and some fun, but never with tales of Hell if they stray from their path of goodness and love towards us.  And then, each morning, we sit by our pond with a nice cappuccino I prepare in our kitchen, and we sit by our pond, and feed our three Koi’s, Harriet, Nick and Nora. We named our koi’s after 1930s radio program characters, Ozzie and Harriet, and the detectives Nick and Nora Charles.  And, yes we speak to them, or perhaps at them as we feed them some floating Koi’s food, chatting about their dining experiences this fine day.  And again, we never mention that God thingie up above, mainly because it would seem even sillier than our chats with them.

And then, every now and again, we are visited by our newest great granddaughter. And no one ever mentions god to her, at least not yet because she is way too young to understand that awful concept.  Whether she receives guidance in that regard is, happily, not our responsibility, but her parents.

But again, what if we lived in a world free of such concepts?

I have often wondered why that first human ever created the concept of God. I mean, what would have driven an early human to create such a concept? Was it an act of desperation, a human driven to such an idea because the very notion of “Nothingness” was simply unacceptable? Or was it perhaps an act in which some early human was seeking a measure of power or control over other humans, and claiming such knowledge granted instant power.  And as I wandered through the mists of time, I realized that religion has a complex and very old origin. That Christ on a Cross thing defines only one part of religion’s origins, depending on what you might like to think of as “religion. And the more I read, the more confused did I become.  How about “animism”, the concept that all things, including rocks have souls—see  Edward Tylor through his 1871 book Primitive Culture.  And in Wiki, another author, Nurit Bird-Davis speaks of animism. Nurit Bird-David argues that: “Positivistic ideas about the meaning of 'nature', 'life' and 'personhood' misdirected these previous attempts to understand the local concepts. Classical theoreticians (it is argued) attributed their own modernist ideas of self to 'primitive peoples' while asserting that the 'primitive peoples' read their idea of self into others!” She explains that animism is a "relational epistemology" rather than a failure of primitive reasoning. That is, self-identity among animists is based on their relationships with others, rather than any distinctive features of the "self". Instead of focusing on the essentialized, modernist self (the "individual"), persons are viewed as bundles of social relationships ("dividuals"), some of which include "superpersons" (i.e. non-humans).

So you see why the more I read, the more confused I become.  But key here is that thinking of and articulating views about the “otherworld” are very old, reaching back thousands of years into the BC era.  And views about “God” are many and also reach back very far into the past. Again, from Wiki: In monotheistic thought, God is usually viewed as the supreme being, creator, and principal object of faith. God is usually thought of as being omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent as well as having an eternal and necessary existence. God is most often held to be incorporeal, with said characteristic being related to conceptions of transcendence or immanence.

Some religions describe God without reference to gender, while others use terminology that is gender-specific and gender-biased. God has been conceived as either personal or impersonal. In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. Atheism is an absence of belief in any God or deity, while agnosticism deems the existence of God unknown or unknowable. God has also been conceived as the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent". Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of conceived God.

So, needless to say, most thoughts about religion are all over the map of logical and even illogical thinking.  We can construct many counter-arguments about God, but for every counter-argument, there are several counter-counterarguments. My personal belief system, probably leans toward the agnostic, i.e., we do not and likely never will “Know” whether God exists, at least until we die, and then all brain activity ceases, thereby at least getting in the way of understanding the God thing.

I guess I understand why people all over the globe might develop some sense of an ethereal life force. I mean how else to explain why we are all here?  An accident might be the most logical explanation, but surely it is the least satisfying. A superforce creator, i.e., a GOD, who either created all this stuff, including us, or at the least oversaw the creation seems at least as reasonable.  So, it seems reasonable that, as early folk wondered about this question, at least some of them would have conceived of a creator—a superbeing.

But then comes religion, And that seems different in kind. Religion is really just a set of rules by which one is to live, depending on your particular view of that superbeing.  And the key to the central problem of all organized religions, is that some folks argue that they have been chosen to understand all the rules of the game.  See, that superbeing actually speaks to them, so they are able to interpret the rules of life. And, it is important to understand, that LIFE has RULES. You can’t just live your life without paying attention to God’s rules. And those “God’s Rules” thing is what makes me wonder about what life on this planet would be, without them.

So far as we know, our animal kingdom, and our insect kingdom operate largely without written rules of behavior. And typically, the critters, should they operate in violation of some actual rule of existence, will end up as someone’s lunch, or, at the least, laying in a ditch somewhere. Similarly, our various plant kingdoms seem to either thrive or wither depending on the whims of the gods of weather. Nobody instructs your daffodils on their behavior.

So, how come we humans seem to need all these “rules of behavior”.  Well, mainly, it seems to me that humans allowed to act on their own, like hummingbirds, or lions invariably seem drawn to the lion behavior pattern. That is, humans seem not drawn to behave nicely to other humans, and that forms the basis for organized religion.  Lately, we observe American humans drawn to killing machines, and, even though we do have rules of behavior that frown on humans killing other humans, many humans choose to ignore those rules of behavior, whether the rules are religious, or legal.  As humans, many of us seem to get off on killing other humans—see Vlad Putin and his gang of thugs, and all those NRA folks armed with AR-15s.

And organized religion, despite all its rules, seems completely incapable of controlling either force. So, maybe the rules of organized religion are largely intended to control other, more civilized activities, like sex, or payments to priests to keep them from frowning on us.  In any case, the many rules of religion seem not to do us much good, given their incapacity to prevent humans from killing other humans.  Instead, they focus on having fun, including those games people play with each other, called Sex.  Those “Thou Shallt Not Kill” rules seem now merely quaint.

So, maybe now might be a good time to simply switch off the rules of religion, and assume that people will be guided exclusively by the rules of our legal system—you know, if you kill someone, there is a reasonable chance you will yourself be killed, or at least locked up.  And as to those rules regarding sex, i.e., contraception, abortion, sex aimed at fun rather than more kids, maybe they should just go the way of all fairy tales.  And should the seriously religious, e.g., Amy Coney Barrett and her BFFs, object, perhaps they should just go somewhere else to live, say the North or South Poles, where they can chat it up with whales and penguins, who won’t listen to them either.

But life here might just be more pleasant for the rest of us. We could remove most of the guns in our Land, and provide everyone who wants one, some condoms to play with.  Convert all the churches to children’s playgrounds, and homes for the homeless. That would be nice. And maybe all the priests of the land could go out and get real jobs, driving trucks perhaps.  That would be useful in addition to being nice.

Only Money Matters

So apparently it is now true. The only thing that actually matters in America is money.  It used to be different. Some things used to matter more. Remember the anti-War protests in Washington? They brought out thousands to protest American government intervention in Vietnam. Eventually, under Nixon, America finally lost its first War, and our policy changed. We moved away from Vietnam.

It makes me wonder what the equivalent might be in the case of Mass shootings.  What’s a “mass shooting” you ask? Well, from Wiki:

“The Congressional Research Service defines it as "public mass shootings", defined by four or more victims killed, excluding any victims who survive.^[5][6] The Washington Post and Mother Jones use similar definitions, with the latter acknowledging that their definition "is a conservative measure of the problem", as many shootings with fewer fatalities occur.^[7][8] The crowdsourced Mass Shooting Tracker project has the most expansive definition of four or more shot in any incident, including the perpetrator in the victim inclusion criteria.^[9][10] A 2019 study of mass shootings published in the journal Injury Epidemiology recommended developing "a standard definition that considers both fatalities and nonfatalities to most appropriately convey the burden of mass shootings on gun violence."^[11] The authors of the study further suggested that "the definition of mass shooting should be four or more people, excluding the shooter, who are shot in a single event regardless of the motive, setting or number of deaths."^[12]

As of December 2021, 693 (of which 303 resulted in zero deaths) fit the Mass Shooting Tracker project criterion, leaving 703 people dead and 2,842 injured, for a total of 3,545 total victims, some including the shooter(s)”.

And this was only one year. We have similar losses every year, mainly because we refuse to deal with the gun lobby. And the gun lobby is all about money. The NRA and the gun manufacturers make a lot of money by making and selling guns of all types to citizens, regardless of the citizens’ actual needs.  Now, I understand the argument that asserts that, “Guns are not the problem, People are the problem.” But then I wonder, “well what might happen if all those gunmen had been armed with six-foot spears instead of semiautomatic rifles?”  Hmmm. That might have been more useful even than “Thoughts and Prayers”.

But instead, we continue to allow folks to give money to a domestic terrorist organization, the NRA, and for that organization, the NRA, to buy Congressmen who are willing to block any attempt to change laws regarding guns. Yeah, Thoughts and Prayers indeed.  I wonder what might have happened if Mitch McConnell’s grandkids had been shot and killed. Or maybe if any of the Trump kids had been shot and killed by a mass shooter. Hmmmm. Would real actions might then have occurred?

Oh, and then we have Climate Change—you know, that fake news event in which some silly folks keep yelling about cataclysmic changes to our globe, that threaten our very existence.  So, are there actual Facts about Climate?

Fiction: Climate Change is a Natural Phenomenon:

Fact: Well, NO, it’s not Earth, It’s US.  The climate has changed naturally in the past, but that’s not what’s happening today. Right now, the world is warming up to 50 times faster than it has previously. That’s because humans have burned billions of tons of coal, oil and natural gas, which release carbon pollution into the air that traps the sun’s heat. That pollution can remain in the air for thousands of years, making the planet hotter and hotter. Right now, there is already a thick blanket of carbon pollution surrounding the earth, dangerously warming the planet.

 Fiction: Climate change is way off in the future.

Fact: IT’S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. We’re not talking about some far off threat. Heat-trapping pollution is already harming people right here, right now. Across the country, we’re experiencing record-breaking disasters. In the west, hot, dry conditions are fueling massive fires, with smoke that blocks out the sun and poisons the air. In the southwest, historic droughts threaten our food supply. And in the south, warmer oceans are fueling stronger, deadlier hurricanes that are destroying people’s homes and lives.

Fiction: There is nothing we can do about it.

Fact: THERE IS STILL TIME TO ADDRESS IT! (BUT NOT MUCH.)

It’s not too late to prevent the worst case scenarios. But to do so, we must stop polluting, and that means moving from fossil fuels to the clean, renewable energy sources of the 21st century. As a society, we already have the technology to build a clean economy that creates millions of jobs and a stable world. But we must act now.

And how is money involved here?? Well, for one thing, coal and oil production and usage, which contribute to climate change involve money, i.e., the companies and regions that produce have zero interest in switching to renewable energy sources, because it means they might lose money.  And what areas are most suggestive of real and dangerous climate change?

From NASA:

Global Temperature Rise: The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century. The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere and other human activities. Most of the warming occurred in the past 40 years, with the seven most recent years being the warmest. The years 2016 and 2020 are tied for the warmest year on record.

Warming Ocean: The ocean has absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 100 meters (about 328 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969. The ocean has absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 100 meters (about 328 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit (0.33 degrees Celsius) since 1969. Earth stores 90% of the extra energy in the ocean.

Shrinking Ice Sheets: The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 279 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2019, while Antarctica lost about 148 billion tons of ice per year.

Glacial Retreat: Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska, and Africa. Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska, and Africa.

Decreased Snow Cover: Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and the snow is melting earlier. Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and the snow is melting earlier.

Sea Level Rise: Global sea level rose about 8 inches (20 centimeters) in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and accelerating slightly every year. Global sea level rose about 8 inches (20 centimeters) in the last century. The rate in the last two decades, however, is nearly double that of the last century and accelerating slightly every year.

Declining Arctic Sea Ice: Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades. Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.

Ocean Acidification: Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30%. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30%. This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the ocean. The ocean has absorbed between 20% and 30% of total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions in recent decades (7.2 to 10.8 billion metric tons per year).

But these are just facts, and increasingly, Americans are not interested in facts. Americans want feel good stories that support their view that they personally do not have to do anything different.  They can just , “Keep on truck’n”.  And that’s the job of Tucker Carlson and his Fox News BFFs.  He and Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham are paid very large amounts of money to lie to us, with their lies reminding us that we do not have to do anything different. Just keep on watching them, buy their sponsors’ products and all will be good for the world.

Yep, this too is All About the Money.  And will voting matter? Well, it could but I would not bet your kids on it.  Remember, Pennsylvania just voted to nominate Doug Mastriano, who asserts: “ I am calling for additional funds in this year’s state budget to be utilized by school districts to improve mental health resources including increasing the number of guidance counselors and improving training for teachers and administrators to help them identify potential warning signs and proper referral and intervention techniques. Additionally, the funds could be used for armed resource officers, arming teachers, metal detectors, door fortifications, emergency response training, and other mitigation measures.” Yeah, gotta arm those teachers. That’s the solution.

So, will voting matter? Well, Take It Away, Pennsylvania voters.