Losing the Plot

It’s not often I agree with these purveyors of false prophets, but given the religious diatripe, this guy has got it nailed.

Society is losing the plot, says Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks

Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks was granted a life peerage four years ago

Society is “losing the plot” as it becomes more secular and less trusting, the UK’s outgoing Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks has said.

In an interview with BBC Radio 4’s Sunday programme, Lord Jonathan Sacks said the growth of individualism over the past 50 years was responsible for a pervasive breakdown in trust.

“When trust breaks down, you see institutions break down,” he continued.

He will be succeeded by Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, an ex-chief rabbi of Ireland.

Lord Sacks, 65, who is to step down next month after 22 years in office, highlighted the 2008 financial crisis and the declining marriage rate.

He said: “I think we’re losing the plot actually. I think we haven’t really noticed what’s happened in Britain.”

He added: “If people work for the maximum possible benefit for themselves then we will not have trust in industry, in economics, in financial institutions, we will not see marriages last.”

He also said institutions, including marriage, broke down “when you begin to lose faith and society becomes very, very secularised”.

‘Stable association ‘

“It’s not the fault of one government or another, and it’s not even the fault of government,” he added.

“It’s the fault of what we call culture, which is society talking to itself.”

Read more

Read more


The photo and religious affiliations are included to keep to the article format. They bear no relation to my point of interest.

But the guy has got it right.

Humanity, in general, has lost the plot.

We have become too egotistical, self-centred and greedy. That’s the way our culture has grown.

To my mind, it has absolutely nothing to do as to whether we are religious, or show off by going to church, it has simply become our nature. The dollar (pound, whatever) has become all important to the detriment of ALL ELSE!

Until we fix that, the plot will always elude us.

This situation is being exploited by the likes of this rabbi to say the church is right. WRONG, the church/es is/are as much to blame as anything, so don’t let fancy sermons delude you.


Please Sir, I have a question…

religious-symbols-t8326If I am an atheist, why do I need to obey the laws of a church dominated government?

What I mean is, the government makes many laws that are based on Christian ethics and teachings, why should I adhere to these if they don’t apply to me or my beliefs?

Or, for that matter, laws based on Muslim, Jew, etc, why do the adherents of these religions need to obey Christian values?

Should the government not make the law for everybody based on common values, rather than laws directed by the church/es?

The hot topic of the moment that demonstrates my query is homosexual marriage; why should the church tell the government that it’s not permissible? For some it is permissible, therefore the law should reflect that.

Other issues like polygamy, the Christian church says no, so the law says it’s a crime, but there are people like Mormons and Muslims where it is permissible according to their beliefs. Should the law not reflect the wishes of the people in general and not just the views of one church?

Contraception is regulated, divorce is another thorny area, the abortion issue is like walking on glass, euthanasia even more dangerous; all these issues are personal decisions, right for the person that makes them, why should the church have a say in the making of laws that prohibit them?

If it’s right for the person making the decision, then there should be no interference on religious precepts.

These outdated, antiquated, medieval humbugs are ideas that need to be relegated into history where they belong. The world has moved forward from when these ideas were pertinent, but the church remains stoically in the dark ages and dictates to the state what should, and should not be.

In my opinion the state needs to be divorced from the church, it would save so much grief in the world.

For example, if the laws on abortion were taken off the books, and a person was free to choose whether or not to have one within medical guidelines, there would be no demonstrations that lead to violence and civil disruption. The answer is simple, if you are a Christian and don’t believe in abortion… then don’t have one.

In making the laws the personal beliefs of the politicians must be put aside, they are there to represent the people, ALL people, not just their fanatical religious following.

The religious right don’t own the world, the world should be a place for everyone.


It’s a Puzzle

Homosexual-MarriageGay marriage, it’s a puzzle, Should gays get married? I think not. Marriage is an outdated custom and it should be relegated into the history books.

Even some straight people choose not to get married, they live in a partnership or de facto marriage, so why are gays busting a gut to get married?

Love is not dependent on marriage.

The whole issue is about equality and rights, not marriage. It is the law that determines marriage is essential for certain civil rights like pensions and health plans.

The laws should be changed so that these rights are on the same footing as straight de facto relationships then many gays will not need marriage. The paranoid religious right would then not even feel threatened, they can continue with their bigotry just as they always have.

In fact, many gays already are against marriage…

The gay people against gay marriage

After France’s first same-sex marriage, and a vote in the UK Parliament which puts England and Wales on course for gay weddings next summer, two US Supreme Court rulings expected soon could hasten the advance of same-sex marriage across the Atlantic. But some gay people remain opposed. Why?

“It’s demonstrably not the same as heterosexual marriage – the religious and social significance of a gay wedding ceremony simply isn’t the same.”

Jonathan Soroff lives in liberal Massachusetts with his male partner, Sam. He doesn’t fit the common stereotype of an opponent of gay marriage.

But like half of his friends, he does not believe that couples of the same gender should marry.

“We’re not going to procreate as a couple and while the desire to demonstrate commitment might be laudable, the religious traditions that have accommodated same-sex couples have had to do some fairly major contortions,” says Soroff.

Until the federal government recognises and codifies the same rights for same-sex couples as straight ones, equality is the goal so why get hung up on a word, he asks.

“I’m not going to walk down the aisle to Mendelssohn wearing white in a church and throw a bouquet and do the first dance,” adds Soroff, columnist for the Improper Boston.

“I’ve been to some lovely gay weddings but aping the traditional heterosexual wedding is weird and I don’t understand why anyone wants to do that.

“I’m not saying that people who want that shouldn’t have it but for me, all that matters is the legal stuff.”

Read more

Read more


Neither the church, the government nor companies have any right to meddle in anyone’s relationships or sex life, whether they are straight or gay relationships, polygamy, etc or not.

Come on, as all humans, we are consenting adults, we can responsibly consent to what we want in the bedroom, what we see as best for us. We do not need antiquated laws from another time to dictate to us.

My opinion, is simply let people get on with their lives on an equal footing, what ever they choose.

The whole legal question needs a revamp. I have rights in society, at work and within the law, why can’t my neighbour have those same rights? Is he less human than me? If you answer ‘yes’ to that question, then maybe your rights should be legally truncated.

“Take your rosaries out of our ovaries.”

El Salvador court denies seriously ill woman abortion

Rights groups have argued that “Beatriz” should be entitled to an abortion, with this protester’s slogan reading: “Take your rosaries out of our ovaries.”

The Supreme Court of El Salvador has refused to allow a seriously ill pregnant woman to have an abortion, even though her foetus has almost no chance of survival.

Lawyers for the young woman – who suffers from lupus and kidney failure – had argued that continuing the pregnancy would place her life at risk.

The foetus itself is missing part or all of its brain.

All abortions are prohibited in El Salvador under any circumstances.

The constitution in the majority Roman Catholic country protects the right to life “from the moment of conception”.

The 22-year-old woman – referred to as “Beatriz”, not her real name – is said to be in fragile health, suffering from the chronic immune disorder lupus as well as kidney failure.

Tests suggest her 26-week-old foetus is developing without a complete brain, a condition called anencephaly. Almost all babies born with this condition die before or shortly after birth.

‘Absolute bar’


A medical committee at her maternity hospital, the Ministry of Health and rights groups had all supported Beatriz’s request to terminate her pregnancy, but judges at the Supreme Court voted four-to-one to reject the woman’s appeal.

In their ruling, the judges said: “This court determines that the rights of the mother cannot take precedence over those of the unborn child or vice versa, and that there is an absolute bar to authorising an abortion as contrary to the constitutional protection accorded to human persons ‘from the moment of conception’.”

The judges said that Beatriz’s health was “stable”, although they recognised this could change, ordering doctors to continue to monitor her health and provide all necessary treatment.

Judge Rodolfo Gonzalez, one of the four judges to rule against allowing Beatriz to have an abortion, said the constitutional court could not be turned into a “tribunal to allow the interruption of pregnancies”.

Judge Gonzalez said he had not been convinced Beatriz was at risk of dying if the pregnancy was allowed to continue.

He said the case, and the great number of groups and people who had wanted to offer their opinion on it, had shown there was a need to discuss abortion more widely in El Salvador.


Read more

Read more


This is appalling!

We are in the 21st Century and the courts and lawmakers still bow down to medieval and Christian doctrine.

There is absolutely nothing ‘Christian’ about this decision and the laws that it is based on.

As an atheist, this makes me sick that people can believe in a doctrine that permits such atrocities.

El Salvador, the government, the judiciary should hang their heads in shame; better still hang the lot of them! They are not fit to be classed as humans.

Can’t Upset the Status Quo

Millions on the planet are Christians who have held the belief that Jesus was not married, celibate even are about to be very upset to find that may not be the case.

Celibacy has been a celebrated part of the Christian faith, so much so that the Catholics demand celibacy from their priests based on this premise.


A couple of weeks ago the news burst on the western world that this premise may well be false – See Cat Among the Pigeons on Tomus Arcanum which tells the story of a small piece of papyrus where Jesus mentions “my wife.”

The original BBC story can be read directly.

Then today we have in the news…

‘Jesus wife’ documentary broadcast delayed amid doubts

A TV documentary about a 4th-Century papyrus fragment that makes reference to Jesus having a wife has been delayed amid doubts over its authenticity.

The Smithsonian Channel has pushed backed the broadcast to an unspecified date, while further tests on the Coptic script are carried out.

Scholars have questioned the fragment’s authenticity on grammar and lack of known archaeological provenance.

Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was unmarried. – BBC News


To me the doubters are obviously the pro-celibacy brigade whose myopic view should be discounted.

I have no problems if further tests are carried out.

But the notion that Jesus had a wife, Mary Magdalene was NOT a prostitute  and that celibacy is a crock ‘o shit seems to tie in with what we know of Pope Constantine who removed certain books from the Bible that didn’t suit HIS view of religion, one of which could well have been the book of the 13th Apostle who could well have been Mary.

The religious around the world would be quaking in their boots, centuries of stoic belief are about to be uprooted, the resultant global mental backlash, should this be proven, would be catastrophic.

The credibility of the most revered institution on Earth of all times would crumble. The church would never recover. Oh sure, there would be those adherents who would consider it all some communist plot, but faith would literally be shaken for millions.

The powers don’t want the truth ever to be known. If you don’t have the church, you have no control over the people.

Is it no wonder the broadcast is delayed…..

Is the church too antiquated to lead people?

Put the fear of God into the people

I read often in the news how the church is against this and that, how it fails miserably to thrust itself into the 21st century.

It makes me angry.

The role of the church was to control people; literally to put the fear of God into them so they could be manipulated by the crown. The church has never lead, it has persecuted and committed atrocities in its name whilst serving the crown.

The beliefs of the church have remained rooted in the dark ages while the people have progressed, but the church refuses to progress, refuses to accept that the needs of the people are changing.

The role of the Pope, for example, is woefully inadequate. The church elects some geriatric old fart that has been sequestered away from life to dictate to the people what they should and should not do. This applies to other churches as well, although their geriatric old farts are at least free from the insular surroundings of the Pope, nevertheless, their views are remarkably outmoded.

As long as the church mind remains closed they will lose followers, people who once upon a time feared through ignorance, are now not so ignorant, but educated and open-minded. The fear of the church and God has largely disappeared; in a sense, the churches has become a eunuch, fat and useless, lacking the balls to meet the needs of the people instead of its own self-serving interests.

I read this morning:

Cardinal Keith O’Brien snubs gay marriage talks with Scottish government

Cardinal O’Brien has previously called for a referendum to be held on gay marriage

Britain’s most senior Roman Catholic – Cardinal Keith O’Brien – has suspended direct communication with the Scottish government on gay marriage.

The move is in protest at the Scottish government’s support for the introduction of same-sex marriages.

The cardinal has turned down an invitation to meet government ministers to discuss the new legislation.

Read more


To be honest, that a man who purports to lead the people to have such an attitude makes him unfit for any public office.

To lead the people one must have at least an open mind, not one that perpetrates the church’s bigotry.

The church is worried, very worried. Their only hold on the people in today’s world is marriage. The are clutching at straws to retain that last controlling factor. Once marriage is defunct, the church virtually loses its purpose. They will therefore fight tooth and nail to save their own skins.

The church is the biggest employer on the planet. They are fighting for survival, the needs of the people are secondary. The church is as much of a business as any corporation, if marriage goes, so do the profits.

The church needs to wake up, if it doesn’t, it needs to be woken up.