OVO

Welcome to the Easter Challenge! Our panel of experts – Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and our Mystery Guest – have two thousand years to give consistent answer to simple questions about the resurrection of Christ. No proof is required, only consistent answers. Our questions are prepared by Dan Baker, author of Losing Faith in Faith.

And now, let’s begin… The Easter Challenge!

from OVO 16 AntiChrist (January 2006)

Oscar the Grouch: I Hate Christmas [youtube].

Eric Idle: Fuck Christmas [youtube].

Fear: Fuck Christmas [youtube].

The Attery Squash: Santa’s Laughter Mocks The Poor [youtube].

The Rudy Schwartz Project: A Sandwich for Adolph [youtube].

Current 93: Happy Birthday Pigface Christus [youtube]

Rex Martin – Holidays are Coming [vimeo]

See also our extended Story of the First Christmas from 2009.

Image c/o Retronaut.

Thanks to the following for linking to OVO.

Eithin links to Liberating Wednesday.
Monday Vatican links to The Concordant Story.
Financial Advices Blog links to The Bonus Army.
Rambone at Indiana Gun Owners links to The Bonus Army.
The American Book of the Dead links to Unspeakable Horrors.

Everything has already been said about photography. We have it here in 1911 but even now we can see how it may have been a big mistake.

The Byzantine Iconoclasts were no mere smashers of idols – their arguments ran deep, subtle & profound. They claimed that the Image colonizes the Imagination – other people’s magic overcomes your own personal magic & imprints itself on your soul. Only the Imagination free of such (mis)representation can truly be called autonomous & capable of poiesis, the creative act. To depict the sacred (& all things are potentially sacred) is to degrade it & thus to blaspheme. Only the Eye of the Heart can actually see.

Many Sufis would agree with these sentiments, as would many Jewish & Protestant mystics. The more accurate & scientific the representation the more it lies & blasphemes. “Abstract” art is more moral than any form of realism. Music & architecture, which are simply themselves (ideally), are considered permissible, although Islam suspects even music of threatening the soul’s integrity. But painting & sculpture & especially photography must surely be damned. Looking itself is a compromised or even guilty pleasure, lacking the intimacy of touch or smell or even hearing – too akin to “pure reason” – to cruel.

Against these arguments however we might assert the possibility of Hermetic Imagery – which (as Giordano Bruno or Athanasius Kircher would say) can allow us to free ourselves from the Image through the Image.

Certain symbols, Emblems, hieroglyphs or works of art can liberate the Imagination rather than “enchain” it. These images stimulate your own creativity rather than stifle or suffocate it under their beauty or shock-value or subliminal potency etc.

In the Renaissance this theory of art was called “Egyptian,” thanks to a fortuitous misunderstanding of the ancient hieroglyphs (ie that they were “magic”). Cagliostro was pushing the same notion in the late 19th Century. I believe we need such a theory in order to redeem our various arts – to save them from merely forming new chains, like advertising or propaganda.

Does this argument rescue photography from its own special hell? Maybe not. But maybe there’s something to be said for a touch of damnation. Maybe photography is a vice, like pornography, but then perhaps it could be a magical vice.

If we must have photography in 1911 let it be slow, clumsy, alchemical, rare – somehow still innocent of theory – not so much a spectral doubling but rather Magic Lanterns, a kind of stained glass, primitive & luminous, posed & formal, static, sepia-toned, nostalgic & slightly comical.

On the morning of Sunday, September 11th 2011, I will be drinking coffee with sugar and cream and eating a croissant. I will do this in commemoration of the victory of the Holy Roman Empire and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth over the Ottoman Empire near Vienna on September 11th, 1683.

Wikipedia: Battle of Vienna Culinary Legends

Several culinary legends are related to the Battle of Vienna. One legend is that the croissant was invented in Vienna, either in 1683 or during the earlier siege in 1529, to celebrate the defeat of the Ottoman attack of the city, with the shape referring to the crescents on the Ottoman flags. This version of the origin of the croissant is supported by the fact that croissants in French are referred to as Viennoiserie, and the French popular belief that Vienna-born Marie Antoinette introduced the pastry to France in 1770. [...] After the battle, the Viennese discovered many bags of coffee in the abandoned Ottoman encampment. Using this captured stock, Franciszek Jerzy Kulczycki opened the third coffeehouse in Europe and the first in Vienna, where, according to legend, Kulczycki himself added milk and honey to sweeten the bitter coffee, thereby inventing cappuccino.

I might have a side of bacon, too.

See also Trevor Blake: 9/11 Timeline.

Welcome to the Easter Challenge! Our panel of experts – Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and our Mystery Guest – have two thousand years to give consistent answer to simple questions about the resurrection of Christ. No proof is required, only consistent answers. Our questions are prepared by Dan Baker, author of Losing Faith in Faith.

And now, let’s begin… The Easter Challenge!

from OVO 16 AntiChrist (January 2006)

Followup to my 20 February 2003 post What Happens When a Public Hysteria Dies Out?

What happens when a public hysteria dies out? It seems that everyone agrees to simply not talk about it any more. Y2K created a huge stink – I confess I thought something would ‘happen’ – and now Y2K is all but forgotten. But what about Kelly Michaels, Gerald Amirault, Bernard Baran and Patrick Figured? All of them are currently in prison as a result of the public hysteria of the 90s, ‘ritual abuse.’ The satanic panic has subsided but they remain in prison, for things that they did not do and in fact no one did. Dozens of other people were ‘lucky’ enough to only serve extended prison sentences and lose their homes, friends, family and jobs – they are now out of prison and free to be ‘registered sex offenders’ in their community for the rest of their lives. With so much genuine misery in the world, it is criminal that some people are punished for crimes never committed and other people are made ‘survivors’ who were never victims.

Kelly Michaels spent five years in prison for crimes neither she nor anyone else committed. She was released in 1994.
Gerald Amirault spent eighteen years in prison for crimes neither he nor anyone else committed. He was released in 2004.
Bernard Baran spent twenty-one years in prison for crimes neither he nor anyone else committed. He was released in 2006.
Patrick Figured has spent nineteen years in prison for crimes neither he nor anyone else committed.  He is serving a life sentence, reduced in 1996 from three consecutive life sentences. He was denied an appeal in 1994. “I have learned one thing in here; they can’t do anymore to me than they have… I have lost everything as it is.”

It’s not easy to find up-to-date information on these men and women. The circus has passed and nobody wants to clean up after the elephants and the horses and the clowns. But here are the names I could find of those in prison for crimes neither they nor anyone else committed, all victims of the satanic panic of the 1980s.  What is a convincing argument that this could never happen to you?  That’s right.

Cheryl Amirault
Jason Baldwin
Jack Barnes
Linda Barnes
Damien Echols
Jesse Friedman
Frank Fuster
Robert Halsey
Danny Keller
Fran Keller
Jeanette Martin
Kristie Mayhugh
Jessie Misskelley, Jr.
Elsie Oscarson
Michael Parker
Bruce Perkins
Elizabeth Ramirez
Cassandra Rivera
Ryan Smith
Anna Vasquez
James Watt

Violet Amirault died in prison.
Earl Barnes died in prison.

Further reading
False Memory Syndrome Foundation
National Center for Reason and Justice
Wikipedia, File 18
Wikipedia, Day Care Sex Abuse Hysteria

Alayna May Wyland of Clackamas, Oregon. This young girl was burdened with a mass of blood vessels called a hemangioma at birth. Usually a minor surgery corrects this problem. But Alayna has parents that believe an invisible monster in the sky caused her to be born with a hemangioma, and only incantations and spells to the invisible monster would convince Him to make the hemangioma go away. So her parents said magic spells and rubbed magic oil on their little girl rather than take her to a doctor. The small hemangioma grew large, eroded her eye socket and likely damaged her ability to see.  What’s the harm in faith healing?  Ask Alayna when she’s a little older.  Oregon lawmakers are about one hundred dead children too late in passing this law, but better one hundred dead children too late than one hundred and one children too late.

Steve Mayes: Oregon Lawmakers Appear Ready to End Legal Protections for Faith-Healing Parents

Oregon lawmakers will take the first step today [21 February 2011] toward ending legal protections for parents who rely solely on faith to treat their dying children. The bill targets the Followers of Christ, an Oregon City church with a long history of children dying from treatable medical conditions. A previous crackdown restricted but did not eliminate religious immunity from state criminal statutes. Rep. Carolyn Tomei, D-Milwaukie, said deaths of three Followers children in recent years – all without medical intervention – prompted her to introduce the bill. “Such gross and unnecessary neglect cannot be allowed, even if the parents are well-meaning,” Tomei said. The legislation appears primed for approval. It has wide support both political parties, prosecutors, medical providers and child-protection groups, and there is no organized opposition. “I don’t think there’ll be anyone coming to testify against it,” Tomei said. House Bill 2721 would remove spiritual treatment as a defense for all homicide charges. Moreover, if found guilty, parents would be subject to mandatory sentencing under Oregon’s Measure 11.

Previously at OVO:
The True Face of Faith Healing (27 July 2010)
Ore. parents face charges in child’s death (16 June 2009)
Abusing Children in the Name of God (5 January 2008)
Child Sacrifice in Oregon (4 June 2007)

17 July 1990 interview with V. Vale, publisher of Search and Destroy, co-founder of Re/Search Publications.

OVO: What is the main source for the information that you publish?

VALE: We never tire of saying that our main influences were surrealism and situationism, and surrealism as you know placed a great deal of influence on objective chance and randomness and insanity and systems for deciphering the world that are a-logical systems We will admit that a lot of it is just purely chance. But of course through the years we have friends and our friends really help us. For example, the film book [Re/Search #10 Incredibly Strange Films] which was actually the first book that broke out of our small industrial music underground audience, that was done just because we got a letter from Jim Morton, who had been collecting these incredible films all his life but particularly since the advent of VCR. He wrote us, and then we went over to his house every Saturday night for years and watched two or three of four movies there and ate popcorn. It took four or five years he guest-edited the Incredibly Strange Films book and we put it out. We wouldn’t have done it if we hadn’t known Jim Morton, let’s face it.

OVO: What is the purpose of Re/Search?

VALE: The surrealists had a slogan, something like “Matter Over Mind,” but what it meant was it is a mistake just to assume that one proceeds from the idea to the material reality. Very often its just the opposite. You might say the material reality suggests the theory, shall we say, and frankly I got started publishing back in ’77 because of punk rock. Of course it wasn’t called that then but it was very exciting, as undifferentiated and undefined and unlimited as it appeared to be because it was revolt, it was the youth revolt or revolution (if you dare to use that word) of the ’70s. And I was involved right from the very beginning before it had become codified and more or less set in amber. And so for me it was like a vehicle, it was an opportunity to… I don’t know, I just did it. My main motivation was kind of anger at the status quo. I’d always been angry at the status quo anyway, but, you know, what do you do? A lot of people just become criminals or whatever, or drug addicts, or they just can’t cope for a lot of good reasons. Society gives us all plenty of reasons but it also provides the narcotics in the form of television and actual narcotics so that we can “adapt,” shall we say.  And so yes, it’s definitely a struggle against mind control, against conditioning, against banal information.  We were born with the birthright of curiosity and there’s nothing more natural than to be curious, but of course this faculty is extinguished early in life.  It seems like society does everything it can to either extinguish this faculty or to channel it only along channels of consumption rather than you yourself doing something creative on your own, something creative and original and obsessive and unique on your own.  I don’t think society can really handle that, because it’s too destabilizing.  It’s like we’re in a vast consumption machine, we’re part of it, and society would function (it thinks) better if we would just go along with the programs.  And so obviously anyone who is a lover of freedom is going to go against that in all its manifestations.  And yet it’s not just enough to fight, whatever that means.  You have to eventually start doing something.  And in our case we more or less accidentally discovered that we could do something and sort of realize our own identities and destinies by becoming publishers.  Re/Search however is not the same as Search and Destroy.  Re/Search happened when I met Andrea [Juno] back in 1980, after we’d been very depressed for a year by what we thought was the death of punk rock.  It was certainly the death of punk rock as we knew it, that is as a viable underground, a microcosmos of society.  We were depressed for a year but then realized that this shouldn’t be the end of publishing.

OVO: Are the Re/Search archives open to the public?

Vale: No, because we’re not public figures.  If all we were to do were to run a library we’d never get any work done, and obviously our work comes first.  It’s hard enough as it is right now just to deal with all the business aspects let alone function as some sort of archive.  It so happens that we’ve been attacked by Jesse Helms [R-NC] and Dana Rohrabacher [R-CA] and entered into the Congressional Record because they don’t like our book Modern Primitives, which is yet another Re/Search publication which is advocating a certain theory of self-liberation or exploration.  That’s all it was intended to do, provide theory for this kind of activity, but apparently the powers that be would like to have this kind of theory and information repressed.

OVO: What kind of trouble have they been giving you?

VALE: Actually we should context this in a much wider overview that obviously America right now is under (thanks to less than probably one-tenth of one percent of the population) which is these very organized fundamentalist Christian fascists who have nothing to do with their lives but write letters all day to their congressman and call up advertisers threatening to boycott things like The Simpsons.  In other words, a minority group trying to pretend and camouflaging themselves as some kind of vox populi majority, which they are not. They’re mostly these very ignorant people in the South, people who have long since shut off any creative potential in their lives.  They’re just consumed by envy and they want to control all the rest of the population, who might be having more fun than them in some way. The Reagan agenda was to turn the country back to the McCarthy ’50s, since he was an informer for McCarthy, and to take away all the gains of the ’60s.  That complex agenda is still being realized. Every day there’s some new article in the paper on page 40 how 160 stores in the deep South took away Playboy Magazine from their stands. Little things like that don’t even get reported here on the West Coast. Thing like that are happening all the time but the more you find out about it the scarier it gets.

OVO: Yesterday a group called AIDS Response Knoxville had their office fire bombed. I just found out about that this morning.

VALE: If you could send me the clipping… see, that was not in our paper today. It doesn’t surprise me. So what you have now is a great deal of information containment going on. We’re living in the illusion that all the information is available, that were living in a global village and all that, but most people get their information from TV news, which is of course extremely compressed and bowdlerized and operates by omission. We should all be subscribing to our own little clipping services I suppose to get the kind of news such as the incident you told me about just now.

OVO: I didn’t find out about it from the paper. I found out about it from a friend and he said there’s only a tiny article about it.

VALE: That’s perfect, that’s exactly the way things happen and are happening. The propaganda techniques which Hitler initiated in terms of mass media control of the population, they‘re real good now. Helms is a master of negative campaigning, in which life gets simplified down to whether you’re for child pornography and obscenity or… Helms’ voting record is incredible, he’s a madman, the total enemy of liberty. But even when Helms is gone there‘ll always be someone to take his place. This kind of control mentality will apparently always be with us but yet we’re trying to do a small campaign so that all the minority papers across the country will at least have a copy of his voting record and also start to get a larger overview of all these isolated little incidents that’ve been happening, which together paint an extremely depressing picture of the abridgment of our freedoms.

OVO: Have there been specific incidents of you having trouble with Modern Primitives?

VALE: Knock on wood, no. We had two art shows based on the book, and that‘s how it started. If you don’t have any information on this I’ll send it to you.

OVO: No, I don’t have any.

VALE: Okay, I’ll send you the whole little press packet on that, with all the articles that’ve come out. See, that’s what l mean, someone as relatively hip and aware as you don’t know. Multiply this by about a thousand for all the little environmental groups all over. Their little news things never get reported. I just found out today that all the searches that the FBI did of all these Earth First houses, the people involved with Earth First because of two people blown up by a bomb, the FBI keeps reporting to the news that they blew themselves up rather than what they should be doing which is trying to find out who really did it. I didn’t realize until I read the paper today that all the searches the FBI did of people who deal with Earth First were all warrantless. To me that is really frightening. Did you know that? Do you think that means anything? And we only found out because our good friend Jock Sturges, a photographer, got busted recently. We’ve known Jock for years. For the last twenty years he has specifically focused on, shall we say, beautiful adolescent girls who are developing. But they are not pornography, he’s not the head of a kiddie porn ring by any means. He’s got the most incredibly beautiful negatives you’ve ever seen, eight by ten inch view camera negatives blown up to twenty by twenty-four inch prints that have a million gray tones in them. And we only found out from him that basically the First and Fourth Amendments are dead. The Fourth Amendment is unreasonable searches and seizures. Because the FBI just busted into his house without a search warrant. And this was all done, as Burroughs has kept us appraised of and warned us against all these years, in the name of fighting the “drug problem.” Because here’s what they can say now: they can come in because (a) they have a reason to believe you are about to destroy evidence and (b) they have a right to watch you because they have reason to believe you might try to commit suicide or commit harm to yourself. Isn’t that nice?

OVO: They’ve certainly got our best interests in mind.

VALE: Yes, of course.

OVO: How do you prevent Re/Search from becoming a part of the process of -

VALE: – co-option and assimilation? You’re dealing with what McLuhan called a very cool medium (or is it hot, I can never get that straight), but you’re dealing with a medium that is a book, and do you realize how few people read anymore? The numbers are incredible, how much reading has declined even though the population has doubled. When people do read, what do they read? They mostly lead these airport kind of books. It’s really frightening. The reason most people avoid books is because, let’s face it, there’s only a minority that reads any more, almost everyone else watches television and gets their information from TV. And in order to read effectively I find that l must have complete silence, as much as possible, and this is not the modem way. A lot of people these days, it’s like a conspiracy to keep them from thinking. As soon as they get up in the morning they have their radio blaring or put on a tape or something. We’ve all known people who’ve had the TV on eight hours a day. Of course we don’t know people like that any more, but they’re out there, like zombies or something. And so I still think that if you’re putting something out in a book you have more of a chance of making it with some kind of integrity. Because books aren’t you, Re/Search is not me or Andrea; it’s on its own. And if it has some ideas that light up your brain and catalyze in some way, which is the best that one can hope for… the books really do have a life of their own. And we’re just putting out a combination of information, images and ideas, hopefully, as well as trying to direct people to other books, which continue the same kind of inspiration.

Re/Search
20 Romolo Street #B
San Franslsco CA 94133 USA
http://researchpubs.com/

from OVO 11 CONTROL (September 1991)

Update, February 2011
Jim Morton writes about films, pop culture, and advertising.
http://popvoid.blogspot.com/

Boyd Rice was formerly credited as guest editor for Re/Search #10 Incredibly Strange Films.
http://www.boydrice.com/

Andrea Juno founded Juno Books.
http://twitter.com/AnimaJuno

Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr. died in 2008.

Dana Tyron Rohrabacher is the U.S. Representative for California’s 46th Congressional district.

AIDS Response Knoxville served at least between 1987 and 1999 and may still exist.

Jock Sturges’ studio was the subject of an FBI raid on 25 April 1990. Accused of child pornography, a Grand Jury did not bring an indictment against him.

Wikipedia, Judi Bari Car Bombing:

In 1990, a bomb exploded in Judi Bari’s car, shattering her pelvis and also injuring fellow activist Darryl Cherney. Bari and Cherney were later arrested after police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation suspected that they had been transporting the bomb when it accidentally exploded. The case against them was eventually dropped due to lack of evidence. Bari died in 1997 of cancer, but her federal lawsuit against the FBI and Oakland, California police resulted in a 2002 jury verdict awarding her estate and Darryl Cherney a total of $4.4 million. Eighty percent of the damages were for violation of their First Amendment rights by the FBI and police trying to discredit them in the media as violent extremists despite ample evidence to the contrary. The bombing remains unsolved.

It is annoying to attend religious services and annoying not to. One who has had deep feelings for some organized religion finally gives up on its extant and visible self, usually after bouts of non-involvement, aggrieved attendance, and conquering indifference.

“It is the evil of the age,” explains the voice of tradition. “It is the self-judgment of an illusion,” comes the modern explanation. Have we really no slicker attitudes to cop than these: a sour sense of personal purity or an embittered belief in our rational integrity?

The real culprit is the whole idea of organized religion, which ought to be stacked next to military intelligence, public education & jumbo shrimp in a museum of dizziness.

How could we have believed that we could walk into any mosque / church / temple – the spiritual equivalent of a waiting room – and find our undiscovered and secret desires? Shame shame shame on us for having tried to share our spirit with less care and precaution than we would ordinarily exercise in sharing our sperm.

The people with whom one can do religion are as rare as those with whom one can make love – and not always the same persons!

Better to make religion a beautiful personal solace, like masturbation, than to rely on paid priests / rabbis / imams, licensed by the state to practice unsafe spirituality and spread mental diseases, especially those which undermine the mind’s natural defenses and immunities against silliness.

Anyone will tell you that religion is a private thing – but I teach you that religion must be a secret thing! Fools, guard your dreams! The wise have none so beautiful as yours!

Therefore, Moorish Orthodoxy. Because the title is less cumbersome than Anarchopaganzen – Hebreaochrislam.

Moorish Science Monitor. Volume 2 Number 6. Winter 1987.

Amnesty International has made its name as a champion of free speech, campaigning on behalf of prisoners who have spoken out against oppressive regimes around the world. But when it comes to speaking up about the organisation itself … well, that seems to be a different story.

Last week [February 2010] Gita Sahgal, a highly respected lifelong human rights activist and head of Amnesty’s gender unit, told The Sunday Times of her concerns about Amnesty’s relationship with Cageprisoners, an organisation headed by Moazzam Begg, a former Guantanamo internee.

Since his release in 2005, Begg has spoken alongside Amnesty at a number of events and accompanied the organisation to a meeting at Downing Street last month. Sahgal felt the closeness of the relationship between Amnesty and Cageprisoners — which appears to give succour to those who believe in global jihad — was a threat to Amnesty’s integrity. “To be appearing on platforms with Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban, whom we treat as a human rights defender, is a gross error of judgment,” she wrote to Amnesty’s leaders following the Downing Street visit.

Feeling her concerns were not being addressed, she decided to go public. Hours after our story appeared she was suspended. Sahgal’s phone started ringing off the hook with news organisations seeking interviews. The story also lit up the blogosphere, partly because of Amnesty’s importance — it has some 2.8m members and a raft of glamorous supporters — but also because what Sahgal was talking about touched that raw nerve, the naivety of white middle-class liberals in dealing with Islamic radicals.

To say the past week has been a difficult one for Sahgal would be an understatement. She fears for her own and her family’s safety. She has — temporarily at least — lost her job and found it almost impossible to find anyone to represent her in any potential employment case. She rang round the human rights lawyers she knows, all of whom have declined to help citing a conflict of interest. “Although it is said that we must defend everybody no matter what they’ve done, it appears that if you’re a secular, atheist, Asian British woman, you don’t deserve a defence from our civil right firms,” she says wryly.

So no one in the human rights world wants to cross swords with Amnesty: that’s no surprise and least of all to Sahgal. “I know the nature of what I’m up against,” she says. “I didn’t do what I did lightly.” [...]

If the men incarcerated in Guantanamo were white fascists, she says, “I hope we would defend them. We would have to defend them — but we wouldn’t necessarily put them on 50 or 100 platforms after that”.

Article continues.

I place small value in knowing a person by the company they keep. Using myself as an example, what could you learn about me by way of my facebook friends? There you will find many men and women who have only myself in common. Were they ever to meet, they would surely wonder about the wretched company I keep. They are Christians and atheists, occultists and skeptics, anarchists and fascists, regular folks and weird artists, feminists and anti-feminists, gainfully-employed and work-free, family-types and libertines, and perhaps even yourself. I will gladly call all of them friend and count myself fortunate for being able to do so. It is also the case that (with luck and effort) people grow and change, old beliefs and identities no longer apply, and (with luck and effort) we can be forgiven for past mistakes. I certainly appreciate when I have been forgiven for my past mistakes, of which there are a few. When Ms. Sahgal questions Amnesty International for the company they keep, I can see some merit in the question but not much. I hope that Mr. Begg has turned the corner and abandoned the more loathsome aspects of Islam, and am willing to give him a chance to demonstrate this is true.

When Ms. Sahgal hopes that Amnesty International would defend white fascists as well as Muslims, she expresses a hope that was closed off years ago. Since February 2006, Amnesty International has adopted the policy that ‘freedom of speech carries responsibility for all.’ In September 2005 the newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve cartoons depicting Muhammad in rejection of the self-censorship the editors saw among publishers afraid of Muslims. Muslims around the world protested in exactly the way they did not protest against 9/11. As quiet as the Muslim world was after 9/11 in which thousands were murdered, they rioted after the publication of twelve cartoons. Hundreds died and great economic damage through arson was done. Rather than commit itself to freedom of speech and the separation of state and superstition, Amnesty International gave the rioting Muslims what they wanted: submission.

Events of recent weeks have highlighted the difficult question of what should be the legitimate scope of freedom of expression in culturally diverse societies. [...] Newspaper editors have justified the publication of cartoons that many Muslims have regarded as insulting, arguing that freedom of artistic expression and critique of opinions and beliefs are essential in a pluralist and democratic society. On the other hand, Muslims in numerous countries have found the cartoons to be deeply offensive to their religious beliefs and an abuse of freedom of speech. In a number of cases, protests against the cartoons have degenerated into acts of physical violence, while public statements by some protestors and community leaders have been seen as fanning the flames of hostility and violence. [...]

The right to freedom of expression is not absolute — neither for the creators of material nor their critics. It carries responsibilities and it may, therefore, be subject to restrictions in the name of safeguarding the rights of others. In particular, any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence cannot be considered legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Under international standards, such “hate speech” should be prohibited by law.

There’s the universal human right of free speech, and then there’s the publication of twelve cartoons in a newspaper. Don’t confuse the two.

Hate speech laws are a funny thing when it comes to religion. The United Kingdom’s Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 is an example. According to this Act, an offence has occurred if “a person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.” But if the “hate speech” is interpreted in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998, which guarantees freedom of religion and expression, then no offence has occurred. Consider the Criminal Code of Canada. It prohibits ‘any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide [against] any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.’ But if the “hate speech” is made ‘to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text’ then the “hate speech” is exempt.

That’s right: religion is exempt from laws protecting religion, and “hate speech” done in the name of religion is allowed while “hate speech” critical of or outside religion is forbidden. This exemption is necessary to preserve and protect the “hate speech” found in the Bible and the Quran. This exemption suggests “hate speech” laws exist to protect religion from criticism, not combat genocide or uphold the universal human right to Not Have Your Feelings Hurt.

I was a member of Amnesty International for many years. I paid annual dues and held fund-raising events. I supported AI because I support freedom of speech. I support the immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscious. AI began as a support system for prisoners of conscious, and some measure of that mission remains in place. But over time, AI has abandoned the success found in doing one simple thing very well in favor of doing a number of exciting things poorly. A few years ago the board of AI was populated by a group that supported adding “economic, social and cultural rights” to the mission of the organization. I will not argue the merits or demerits of these claims here, nor the merits or demerits of AI having a ‘gender unit’ (of which Ms. Saghal was a leader). I will say that advocacy of economic, social and cultural rights are adequately addressed by other organizations and by many millions of individuals. I wrote AI saying that these new goals were at odds with being able to offer support to some prisoners of conscious. I was told that I could get my donated money back but that the decision had been made by a vote to adopt these goals. I replied that the same vote that brought about these changes might bring other changes later on – but apparently not, as I got no reply, AI continues to list left, and with the support of “hate speech” laws AI has abandoned its original mission of supporting prisoners of conscious.

I’m not a believer in natural rights, but I do support laws respecting freedom of speech. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to be mistaken, the freedom to offend, the freedom to criticize, the freedom to inquire. Let Mr. Begg speak, and just as much let Jyllands-Posten publish. I do not claim Ms. Sahgal has been censored, as Amnesty International is not a government organization and did not use the force of law to enforce its way.

All that having been said, Amnesty International has erred by dismissing Ms. Sahgal. Any effort to defend freedom of speech must include a sound criticism of Islam and a record of its crimes. Ms. Sahgal touched the raw nerve, the naivety of white middle-class liberals in dealing with Islamic radicals. For that, she was dismissed from Amnesty International. I still get requests for money from AI. I consider bleeding them of the postage and printing it takes for them to send me these requests to be a small protest against what AI has become.

via youtube.

Chicago Tribune: Man Sues Elgin Church Over Fall

According to the lawsuit, the church’s youth pastor had organized a “mummy race,” in which each of four volunteer leaders was wrapped in toilet paper and plastic wrap so their movements were severely restricted. The leaders’ heads were also enclosed in the mummy wrap, limiting their field of vision.

New York Times: Sex-Assault Case Offers Glimpse of an Amish Community

Mr. Mast, who is married with two children and another on the way, stands accused in Wisconsin of incest and the repeated sexual assault of a minor. Meanwhile, officials here have charged him with two counts each of statutory rape and sodomy and one count of sexual misconduct involving a child. Investigators claim that Mr. Mast has victimized at least six girls, ages 5 to 15 — including some outside the Amish community — over the last 10 years. [...] “We tried to work with it ourselves,” said Joseph Wagler, the bishop for a neighboring church. “We punished him, and he owned up to it. We put him away from the church, as a community.” Community members say that in an effort to cure Mr. Mast of his affliction, they excommunicated him on three occasions: in 2004 when he returned from Wisconsin amid accusations that he had raped his cousin; and again in 2009, when new revelations surfaced of his alleged sexual misconduct. The third excommunication came this year, when after a tortuous internal debate, the community appealed to law enforcement.

New York Times: Belgian Church Leader Urged Victim to Be Silent

The former leader of the Roman Catholic Church in Belgium urged a victim of serial sexual abuse by a bishop to keep silent for a year, until the bishop — the victim’s own uncle — could retire, according to tapes made by the victim last April and published over the weekend in two Belgian newspapers.

KPTV Portland: Faith-Healing Couple Facing Criminal Charges

Dale and Shannon Hickman were arraigned Monday on charges of second-degree manslaughter. Their trial is scheduled to begin Nov. 19 at the Clackamas County Courthouse. The Hickmans are the third couple identified as members of the Followers of Christ Church to face criminal charges in the death of a child during the past two years. The church shuns professional medical help in favor of prayer and anointing the sick with oil.

Part of a series that never ends [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] and etc.  Looking through all my articles on child sacrifice, I find that it is not the case that child sacrifice is the exclusive domain of modern day Christians.  They only make up the majority of child sacrifice practitioners.  I hope that prehistoric Toltecs and contemporary Jews will not feel slighted if I emphasize child sacrifice among modern day Christians.  I am influenced by the proximity of a primary alter for child sacrifice.  Just a short drive from where I am sitting now stands the Followers of Christ Church in Oregon City, Oregon. Nearly eighty children whose parents attend this church are known to have died from preventable causes since 1955.  And the Oregon Revised Statue for felony murder or first degree manslaughter include exceptions for child sacrifice.  You couldn’t get away with sacrificing your child to the Spirit of Liberty, or Scrappy Doo, or Jenny 8675309.  But if you sacrifice your child in the name of Jesus and you pray with sincerity, with deeply held beliefs, then you’re golden.  Murdering and raping children can be prevented by the simple expedient of talking about these atrocities.  That’s why I publish horrible articles like this.  That’s why Christians from the Amish to the Roman Catholics keep it quiet.  And the difference between my way and the Christian way is why I advocate the withering away of Christianity under the twin suns of reason and scorn.

Mail Online: Claudy Bombing Priest James Chesney, Cover-up Agreed by Police, Ministers and Church

The British government and the Catholic Church colluded to cover up Father Jim Chesney’s role in the 1972 bombing that killed nine people, it was revealed today.

Salt Lake Tribune: LDS Church Sued for Baptism for the Dead Injury

In a civil suit filed in 3rd District Court on Wednesday, Daniel Dastrup claims he suffered a severe herniated disk in his lumbar spine after performing about 200 baptisms on Aug. 25, 2007. The then 25-year-old claims some of the young men and women he completely immersed in water in the name of the dead weighed as much as 250 pounds.

BV Black Spin: Martin Luther King Jr.s Niece Calls Gay Marriage ‘Genocide’

The niece of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. addressed a crowd at a National Organization for Marriage rally last weekend in Atlanta. Dr. Alveda King passionately addressed the issue of same-sex marriage, stating that it would lead to “extinction” and “genocide.”

Jeannie Nuss: Bikini-Clad Strippers Protest Church in Rural Ohio

The strippers, fueled by Cheetos and nicotine, are protesting a fundamentalist Christian church whose Bible-brandishing congregants have picketed the club where they work. The dancers roll up with signs carrying messages adapted from Scripture, such as “Do unto others as you would have done unto you,” to counter church members who for four years have photographed license plates of patrons and asked them if their mothers and wives know their whereabouts. [also]

AFP: US Catholic Church Tarred with New Child Sex Abuse Scandal

The Roman Catholic Church in the United States has become embroiled in a new pedophilia scandal with six women and one man alleging sexual abuse by a priest over three decades. The lawsuit filed Wednesday in Oakland, California accused Father Stephen Kiesle of acts of sexual abuse between 1972 and 2001, and alleged that Catholic Church officials knew of the crimes but did not stop them.

Anne Rice: ‘Today I Quit Being A Christian’

For those who care, and I understand if you don’t: Today I quit being a Christian. I’m out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being ‘Christian’ or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to ‘belong’ to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten years, I’ve tried. I’ve failed. I’m an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.

Reuters: Austrian Churchgoers Quit in Record Numbers

A record 100,000 Austrians are expected to leave the Roman Catholic Church this year after abuse scandals which have badly damaged its image, a newspaper reported on Tuesday. Some 57,000 quit the church in the first six months of the year, Austrian daily Der Standard reported, citing figures from local state authorities. This is already more than the full-year total for 2009 when 53,216 walked out.

Part of a series that never ends [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10][11] and etc.  May Christianity wither away under the twin suns of reason and scorn.

OUTLAW CHRISTIANITY! DEATH TO ALL CHRISTIANS!

The above does not reflect the intention of OVO, and in fact stands opposite to it. The above is provided to feed the presuppositions of those who will not actually read this issue of OVO. Any review of this issue that quotes the words above is likely to have been written by someone who never read beyond them to learn what OVO actually states. This issue of OVO has a purpose, but the likelihood that it will be misrepresented is great enough that a clear statement of what the purpose is not is in order.

OVO does not advocate the criminalization of Christianity. Existing criminal law suffices to address what is harmful, and law is among the least appropriate means of addressing what is merely mistaken. Christians deserve equal sanction by the law, and voluntary and informed activities among consenting adults (including religion) should not be outlawed.
OVO does not advocate the murder of Christians except in self-defense. Because of the potential for legal error, capital punishment is immoral in all cases. War and murder are immoral in all cases except in self-defense. Except in self-defense, it is always immoral to kill (including killing Christians).

OVO does not advocate the replacement of the Christian God with another God, a Goddess, a pantheon of deities, nature worship, or similar substitution. OVO does not advocate worship, be it of the Christian God or any other. To any reader who uses OVO to build up their own superstition: your faith is equally contemptible.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it does not understand it. Many years research went into this issue, and along the way misunderstandings about Christianity (whether in its favor or against it) were abandoned. OVO criticizes Christianity not because it does not understand it, but because it is worthy of criticism.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because the editor had a traumatic experience with Christianity. The editor had a generally positive experience with Christianity while growing up and has Christian friends today. It is a silent admission of defeat that Christians use this psychological, secular explanation for why someone might criticize their superstition. The editor came to reject Christianity the old fashioned way: by reading the Bible.

OVO is not critical of Christianity because the editor is possessed by Satan, demons or evil spirits. Such ghosts have never existed.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a socialist publication. OVO is not a socialist publication.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Christianity is false. Christianity is false, but that is not in itself sufficient reason to advocate that it wither away. There are many non-fiction books, films, plays, poems and recordings that are also false but serve to inspire humanity. But these false stories do not claim to be true, are not taught to impressionable children as true, and are not used to support legislation that meddles in the affairs of non-Christians. No one is arguing that the epics of Homer be taught as history; no one is legislating that Aesop’s fables be posted in courtrooms. These stories, though false, serve to inspire those who seek them out and are rightly preserved. It is the secular power of Christianity that is the problem, not merely its falsehood. Christianity does not attempt to identify and lessen its falsehoods: it revels in them as ‘tests of faith.’ Christianity is holding back science and art, culture and philosophy, tools that actually can and actually have improved humanity’s lot in an indifferent Universe.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because it is a good religion perverted to bad ends. It is much more the case that a few good people (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, perhaps) have perverted the bad religion of Christianity to good ends. All the good done in the name of Christianity could and does occur through entirely secular means. What remains distinctly Christian if such duplication of labor is removed? Threats of eternal damnation, denial of the pleasures and wonders of this short life, confusion and deception. When Christianity has supported individual rights it has done so only after a ‘revelation’ that (a) goes against its own history and (b) miraculously is in harmony with contemporary public opinion. For example, many Christians opposed slavery in the United States; but many more supported slavery and did so for much longer. Even today the Bible contains many passages supporting slavery and not one passage condemning it. Christianity is a slave religion, a misogynist religion, a queer-killing religion, a nonsense religion, but good people keep twisting their bad faith to good ends. Wouldn’t it be better to just do good deeds without wasted efforts to placate an invisible monster that lives in the sky?

OVO does not criticize Christianity to criticize individual Christians. It is often the case that an attack on a person’s unconsidered beliefs is perceived as an attack on their person. If a person’s beliefs are profoundly unconsidered, to merely state that one holds differing beliefs is perceived as an attack. For example, Christians who see other superstitions get equal time in the eyes of the law sometimes complain that their freedom of religion is under attack. Those who hold considered beliefs are secure when challenged and (hopefully) willing to admit error. Those who hold unconsidered beliefs, who repeat what they have been told without deliberation, are more likely to confuse who they are with what they believe. Christianity, like all religions, encourages strong belief but also encourages a lack of consideration. Posturing, bullying and stubbornness are substitutes for consideration of belief among most Christians.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because its claims contradict the evidence of our senses, science, history, archeology, astronomy, mathematics, common sense and the like. It is true that Christianity is incompatible with all of these, but science progresses by way of challenges to all our claims. If Christianity challenges the evidence of our senses, all the better: let the challenges be considered and considered again. If the Bible contradicts science, science can be tested to see if the Bible has a better explanation for reality. Where the Bible holds true, the Bible holds true. Where the Bible is found to be false, it should either be re-written or re-classified as folk tales. Resolving contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses can be of value to us all, and so the contradictions between the Bible and the evidence of our senses are not in themselves why the Bible should be criticized. Internal contradictions in the Bible, and holding on to falsehood when falsehood has been identified, are worthy of the greatest of criticisms.

OVO does not criticize Christianity as an argument for atheism. The editor is preparing an argument for atheism that is distinct from this argument against Christianity.

OVO does not criticize Christianity because Jesus Christ was a good person whose followers have gone astray, or because we do not have the secret teachings of Jesus, or because Jesus was a complex person with both good and bad qualities. Jesus never existed.

In 1991, the editor published A Call to Heresy on a BBS in Knoxville, Tennessee USA. The document found its way onto BBS’ around the world as well as other formats, including an Internet domain in Hong Kong and a CD-ROM of public domain texts published by Palm Computers. Various editions of the text can be found on the Internet today. Some of the research done for that text has found a new home here in OVO 16 AntiChrist.

OVO criticizes the Bible. Some Christians say that it is an error to overly attend to what the Bible says, and one should rely on the Bible as inspiration rather than fact. But the Bible itself makes claims of perfection, and so taking it at its word in claims of perfection are as justified as any other perspective; perhaps more justified than some ‘inspired’ interpretations. If any interpretation of the Bible is as good as any other, then Christians in no way can distance themselves from the worst among them. Having failed to amend the contradictions, atrocities and absurdities in the Bible with over two thousand years to do so, it is reasonable to conclude that the Bible is considered factual among Christians. Some Christians (called Dominionists or Fundamentalists or Conservatives or the Christian Right) are explicit in their claim that the Bible is factual, while the rest hold it to be factual but requiring ‘interpretation’ (often by way of asking the reader to simply ignore parts of the Bible).

But this issue of OVO does not limit itself to criticisms of the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church claims a history pre-dating the Bible. Martin Luther, founder of Protestant Christianity, wrote inspired texts. The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints and the Watchtower Society claim to have Christian revelations in modern times. All of these Christians are well deserving of criticism and contempt.

There are a set number of responses offered by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs. The first and most common is to be told that these Bible verses have been taken out of context. It is claimed that the verses surrounding these quotes give them a meaning other than their apparent meaning. If this is the case it will be easy to demonstrate; full citations for each quote are given throughout. The reader is encouraged to read the Bible. There is no more sure path to rejecting Christianity than understanding it. Some claim that the contexts of the times change how we should understand the Bible. But does the Bible say it is relevant only until the time of Job (the last time God speaks directly to humanity), or does it claim to be relevant to all times? Some claim that one translation of the Bible offers a more accurate account than another, but existing fragmentary early Christian texts contain their own contradictions, atrocities and absurdities.

The second common reply made by Christians when confronted with their own beliefs is that the Bible, God, Jesus and the rest are not to be understood by reason in the way math or science is. Christianity is to be understood by faith, by the heart, by the spirit, by the soul. Therefore any apparent contradictions, atrocities or absurdities should be ignored because those are all ‘reason’ and not ‘faith.’ But there is no ‘alternative to reason’ as faith is said to be. One can hope, one can wish, one can pretend and ignore, one can scream or run away or kill one’s critics, but none of these are alternatives to reason. Even if there were an alternative to reason, how is the ‘feeling’ that Christianity is true (and all other religions false) different from the ‘feeling’ that Islam is true (and all other religions are false)? Why is it that Christian ‘feelings’ are so regional – does God not inspire such ‘feelings’ everywhere equally? Why don’t children have that ‘feeling’ until an adult tells them to say they do, and why do adults spend so much effort making sure that ‘feeling’ is planted in children?

All religions claim to be the only true religion. Even the ecumenical religions claim to be the only true religion, by claiming that the non-ecumenical religions are false. But since all religions contradict each other at most only one can be the only true religion. Since all religions by definition put themselves outside what can be demonstrated as true, it would be unjust to establish any religion as secular law because the likelihood of error would be too great. Suppose Mithrism became the law of the United States when actually it was Ah Pook that was the real living God? Those countries that have a legal assumption of atheism serve freedom the most. At times this has been the case in the United States, where OVO originates. Christianity threatens the legal presupposition of atheism in the USA, necessitating this issue of OVO. Christianity is the superstition behind the US support of Israel, the war in Iraq, lack of access to Plan B and a vaccine for two strains of cancer-causing HPV, the removal of science from public education, the ongoing imprisonment of the West Memphis Three (among others), blue laws, laws forbidding atheists from holding elected office and more. Reform from within should occur in Christianity. Civil discourse should occur between Christians and non-Christians. But should Christianity elect to ignore the opportunities of positive reinforcement, let it learn the sting of negative reinforcement. OVO is not reforming Christianity from within, nor is it a civil discourse. It is an attack – using only Christianity’s own beliefs as weapons. When Mithrism or the faithful of Ah Pook establish their superstition as law in the USA, they will be equally worthy of criticism. Readers in countries where Islam or Judaism are the majority superstition are encouraged to make similar efforts.

This issue of OVO advocates the withering away of Christianity through reason and scorn. Reason alone withers Christianity to a hostile party guest that has long overstayed his welcome; scorn provide us with laughter and satisfaction as we show him to the door. Perhaps reason alone, or reason and compassion, might be a more noble endeavor. But any belief that cannot withstand a little mockery is perhaps not worth holding in the first place.

Subject religious organizations to the same requirements as secular non-profit organizations: demonstrate they perform a quantifiable public good to receive tax-exempt status. Do not donate any funds, labor or resources to Christian organizations: there are secular equivalents to any Christian organization for those who seek to aid others. Do not vote for politicians who make their Christianity a part of their platform. Oppose ‘faith based’ funding and theocratic laws. Learn more about Christianity than the Christians themselves. Confront Christians with their own claims and history.

OVO is fortunate to originate in the United States, where Christianity and other superstitions may be legally practiced and criticized. The United Kingdom, Holland, Sweden, Italy, Turkey, Norway, Canada and other countries forbid criticism of religion as a form of ‘hate crime,’ while China, North Korea and other countries forbid religion as a form of ‘thought crime.’ In the United States religion may be both practiced and criticized – for now. If Christianity continues to become the state religion of the United States, this may not be the case much longer.

OVO is a tool kit to disabuse the reader of Christianity.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

This essay makes the case against tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon. The amount of revenue lost as well as the harm caused by religious organizations is not compensated for by the social good they are alleged to provide (this alleged social good being the justification for their tax exempt status).

Tax exemption for religious organizations in Oregon brings about three problems for Oregonians. First, there is no definition of religion to differentiate ‘real’ religious organizations from ‘fake’ ones, thus making any decision for or against tax exemption on the part of the government arbitrary. Second, religious organizations are not compelled to make contributions to their community that are comparable to the amount they are awarded in taxes breaks, nor is there any effort or means to hold them accountable for aiding the community. Third, the revenue needs of Oregon could be met by taxing religious organizations at only a fraction of the rate other organizations are taxed.

It is helpful to delineate what is under discussion in any argument. In this case, the topics under discussion are Oregon, taxes exemption and religion. Oregon is the state to the North of California and Nevada, to the South of Washington, to the West of Idaho and with a Western boundary of the Pacific Ocean. Tax exemption means that the agencies in question are not compelled to pay taxes. The definitions for Oregon and tax exemption are easy to find, confirm, and understand. But the search for a definition of religion is doomed to failure.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is, be it on the international level, the national level or the state level. Although many nations define religion as something deserving of political protection, there is no legal definition of what a religion is in international law [1].

There is also no legal definition of what a religion is in United States law. The First Amendment of the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that the religion of a US citizen cannot be used to deny them public accommodation, equal protection under the law, segregation in public education or college education, the right to vote, or employment [2]. While the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ensure protection of religion, neither define what it is they are protecting. The United States has never offered a definition what a religion is, although it has offered a definition of what a religion is not. In Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, the Supreme Court determined that “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection [3].” In the eyes of the law, a religion is anything that declares itself a religion.

There is no legal definition of what a religion is in Oregon law. ORS 128.620 (4) states a “religious organization means any organized church or group organized for the purpose of divine worship, religious teaching, or other directly ancillary purposes [4].” ORS 307.140 states property owned or being purchased by religious organizations is exempt from taxation [5]. ORS 65.001 (39) states that a religious group “is designated a religious corporation by a statute or is organized primarily or exclusively for religious purposes.” The Department of Revenues states that exemption from property tax is available for any religious group that has a constitution, bylaws, or charter which states its mission and purpose [6]. Religious organizations in Oregon are clearly given exemption from property tax, and are clearly expected to ‘be religious.’ But there is no legal definition of what a religion is or how to ‘be religious’ in Oregon law.

Whether it be international law, United States law or Oregon law, there is no legal definition of what a religion is. What if legal sanctions and prohibitions for other issues were left similarly vague? For better and for worse, there are legal definitions to who is and is not a Native American; what is and is not an endangered species; which chemicals are and are not legal to ingest. If there were no definition of who is a Native American, anyone could collect federal benefits reserved for Native Americans. If there were no definition of what an endangered species is, any species could be declared no longer endangered and hunted to extinction. If there were no definition of who is authorized to sell morphine, anyone who would like to make some fast money would do so. The reason legal definitions exist is so that laws may be fairly applied to all, and so that exemptions from the law may be justified. But a religious group is a religious group merely because it claims to be a religious group. Religions exempt themselves from definition, aside from the definition of ‘that which is tax exempt.’

Because there is no legal definition for religion in Oregon, there is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly applied. Some religious organizations may be tax exempt but not deservedly so, while other religious organizations may not be tax exempt and deserve tax exemption. There is no way to determine if religious tax exemptions are being fairly granted to all applicants because there is no way to determine which applicant is ‘being religious’ and which is not. Whatever ‘being religious’ means, religious organizations are exempt from paying taxes. This includes taxes related to their property, businesses, income, and donations.

The justification offered for religious tax exemption is similar to that of secular groups that qualify for non-profit status (501c3). Secular non-profit organizations earn their tax exempt status by providing services that might otherwise be provided by the state, such as housing or medical care. Since the state does not have to pay for these services, no taxes are gathered from organizations that offer such services. Since the perceived need for taxes is thereby reduced, secular non-profit organizations can justify their tax-exempt status.

But there is an important difference between the tax-exempt status of secular organizations and the tax-exempt status of religious organizations. Secular non-profit organizations are held accountable for their work. They must demonstrate that the service they provide is necessary, that they have provided that service, that the service they provided was taken advantage of, and that the cost of lost taxes is less than the benefit of the services provided. If a secular non-profit organization cannot demonstrate each of these characteristics, they do not retain their tax-exempt status.

The standards that secular non-profit organizations are held to makes them very different from religious tax-exempt organizations. Religious tax-exempt organizations are not held to these standards or to any other standard. A religious organization may deliver food to the hungry, offer shelter to the homeless and counseling to the troubled – or they may do none of these things, or it may do these things to a standard far outside accepted norms (such as offering “prayer” as a substitute for medical care or counseling). Religious groups are exempt from taxes whether or not they serve their community and lessen the tax burden. There is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to demonstrate they have delivered food, shelter or other tangible services; there is no legal obligation on a religious group’s part to do anything to retain their tax-exempt status other than filing or re-filing the proper forms. It is not possible to measure measures how much religion Oregonians need, how much religion religious organizations provide, how many people take advantage of religion, whether one form of religion is more beneficial than any other, or whether or not religion is cost effective. While is it possible to state how many people claim religious affiliation, it is not possible to state what that means. It is not possible to determine if a two-year-old just as religious as an adult. It is not possible to legislate how often or in what way a group must be religious to qualify for tax exempt status. Because there is no oversight to determine how much a religious group serves its community, there is no justification for tax exempt status for religious organizations in Oregon.

Oregon law does not state what religion is. Oregon law is also not consistent in when individuals are exempt from legal punishment due to religion. Sometimes activities are forbidden by law irregardless of religion, other times they are allowed if religion is said to be involved. In the case of Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith it was determined that the state of Oregon is not compelled to allow the use of peyote [7]. Although peyote has been a part of Native American religions for centuries, and although the plaintiffs were themselves Native Americans and were using peyote for what they claimed were religious reasons, the state Supreme Court determined they were not entitled to unemployment compensation after being fired due to using peyote. The legal injunction against peyote use trumped their religious claims. This is an example of an activity being illegal whether or not it was ‘religious.’

Conversely, Oregon law provides immunity to many charges if the crime occurred as religion. These crimes have included homicide by abuse or neglect, first and second degree manslaughter, criminal mistreatment, requirements for children to wear a bicycle helmet, and nonsupport of children. Until recently, all of these crimes could be excused if the defendant claims they were committed as religion [8].

All newborns in Oregon are given a drop of vitamin K by law, but parents can prevent their children from receiving protection against spontaneous hemorrhaging for religious reasons.

The Followers of Christ Church in Clackamas County took advantage of religious exemption for murder by allowing nearly eighty children to die since the 1950s from treatable medical conditions. In over half of these deaths, the state did not attempt to establish the cause of death, the record was lost or their deaths were listed as due to ‘natural causes.’ Even when an Oregon medical examiner brought these deaths to the attention of the District Attorney’s office, the prosecutor declined to file charges. In the words of Rita Swan, “a parent may be beating or torturing a child, but if he or she can show that the child was prayed for, criminal charges must be dismissed [9].” Oregon House Bill 2494 revised criminal exemptions for parents who treat children only with prayer in 1999, after hearing opposing testimony by Oregon churches [10]. While child sacrifice in Oregon now carries some consequences, other criminal exemptions such as not requiring a religious child to wear a bicycle helmet remain [11]. These are examples of an otherwise illegal activity made legal by calling it ‘religious.’

One of the larger religious organization in Oregon is the Archdiocese of Portland. The Archdiocese of Portland is under the direct orders of the Roman Catholic Church, led by the Pope of Rome. In 1962, Pope John XXIII gave his approval to a document outlining the policy of the Roman Catholic Church in the event of child abuse by clergy. The policy was to keep child abuse by clergy secret and to transfer abusive priests to new parishes. The policy itself was to be kept secret but was revealed in 2003. The policy has never been retracted [12]; in fact, the current Pope stated in 2001 that the policy was still in effect [13]. More than one hundred and sixty nine victims of clerical child abuse have sued the Archdiocese of Portland for child abuse, and more than $53,000,000.00 has been assigned to settlements so far. While the Archdiocese of Portland filed for and received permission to delay paying its victims, it did have the funds to make building upgrades costing $1.6 million dollars [14]. The Archdiocese of Portland is estimated to own between $300,000,000 and $500,000,000 in property, none of which is taxed. It also owns special-purpose funds, investment funds, and loan funds, none of which are taxed. In 2003 its revenue was no less than and perhaps greater than $8.2 million, none of which was taxed [15]. The Archdiocese of Portland is only one out of 6,862 religious organizations claiming ORS 307.140 tax exemption in the state [16]. To quote the Oregonian, “The Catholic Church operates not by secular law, but by church law [17].”

Religious organizations in Oregon are not compelled to follow the same standards of education and employment as any other educator or employer in the state. Fundamental facts of nature which are part of the basic curriculum for any other school in the state may be omitted or deliberately misrepresented in religious schools. Any secular employer who hires and fires based on gender, ethnicity, sexuality, marital status or beliefs is subject to legal sanctions, but if the employer is religious they may hire and fire at will are protected by law in doing so.

Non-profit organizations (both secular and religious) are forbidden from endorsing political candidates. But some religious tax-exempt groups want to have their cake and eat it too. The Sonrise Church of Hillsboro lost its tax exempt status after partisan campaigning on its property [18]. The Christian Coalition has published the same sort of voting guides that cost the Sonrise Church its tax exempt status [19]. The New Hope Community Church of Clackamas has held partisan campaign meetings on its property [20]. The campaign to elect George W. Bush solicited the support of hundreds of religious organizations [21]. To further blur the line between state and superstition, the House of Representatives has initiated a bill that will merely fine religious organization that engage in partisan politics rather than revoke their tax exempt status [22]. Religious organizations can now avail themselves to federal funds through George W. Bush’s ‘faith based initiatives’ law – but apparently this money is made available mainly to Christian organizations, as few other religious organizations that have applied have received such funds. Under faith based funding, tax dollars can go to agencies that refuse to hire or serve minorities, women, homosexuals or anyone else for any reason.

In 1998 the Audits Division of the State of Oregon Department of Revenue conducted an audit of property tax exemptions. It determined that among religious organizations claiming tax exempt status under ORS 307.140, the sum of $2,010,492,000.00 was lost in tax year 1995-1996 [23]. This figure represents only revenues lost from property taxes, and does not include other lost forms of revenues connected to employment, businesses, museums and other sources of income for religious organizations. The audit states that 41 of the 154 organizations audited that were granted tax exempt status did not even meet the minimal state standards for tax exempt status (whatever those might be). The audit does not specifically state how many of these organizations were tax exempt under ORS 307.140. But the fact that one third of the organizations that claimed (and were granted) exemption totaling seventeen percent of $170.9 billion dollars in property taxes [24] were not qualified to do so suggests that Oregon religious tax exemption law is in dire need of supervision and revision [25]. Among other recommendations, the audit suggested that Oregon needs a clear definition of what a religion is to be able to fairly evaluate applications for ORS 307.140 tax exempt status [26]. This recommendation was not mentioned in the Department of Revenue’s reply [27] nor in a 1999 report on their progress in implementing 1998 audit [28]. Religion continues to go undefined, but religious tax exemption continues to be granted.

At what cost does Oregon grant tax exempt status to religious organizations? The state deficit for fiscal year 2004 was between $950,000.00 and $1,267,000.00 [29]. If religious organizations were taxed only for their property and only at half the rate of any other organization, the state budget would be all-but balanced within a single year.

Being religious, the defining trait that has no definition, is in the main an excuse to do as one pleases without consequence in Oregon. The majority of religious organizations in Oregon do not abuse and sacrifice children. Instead, they do nothing. Doing nothing and ruining childrens’ lives should not be rewarded with tax exemption.

Notes:
[1] Gunn , T. Jeremy: The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of “Religion” in International Law. Harvard Human Rights Journal Volume 16 Spring 2003. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss16/gunn.shtml
[2] Civil Rights Act of 1964. Document Number: PL 88-352. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/civilr19.htm
[3] Thomas vs. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division. 450 U.S. 707. http://laws.findlaw.com/us/450/707.html
[4] ORS Chapter 128 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/128.html
[5] ORS Chapter 307 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/307.html
[6] Property Tax Exemptions for Special Organizations. http://www.dor.state.or.us/InfoC/310-664.html
[7] Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon vs. Smith http://laws.findlaw.com/us/494/872.html
[8] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[9] Swan, Rita. Letting Children Die for the Faith. Free Inquiry, Volume 19, Number 1. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/swan_19_1.htm
[10] Larabee, Mark. Shield-law bills face easy win in House. Oregonian, March 5, 1999 http://www.rickross.com/reference/foc/foc9.html
[11] Children’s Health Care. http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/
[12] BBC News. Excerpts: Vatican document. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3157859.stm
[13] Pope ‘Obstructed’ Sex Abuse Inquiry. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1469055,00.html
[14] Funds are Released to Florence Parish http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/111813879118220.xml&coll=7
[15] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[16] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[17] Sunday Oregonian, May 23, 2004, Page A-14.
[18] Americans United Reports Eight Churches to IRS for Distributing Christian Coalition Voter Guides During November Elections. December 10 1998. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6112&abbr=pr&JServSessionIdr012=i6cieg36h2.app1b&news_iv_ctrl=1502
[19] Christian Coalition of Oregon http://www.coalition.org/
[20] Dobson speaks to NW pastors about same-sex debate. KATU April 5 2004. http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=66042
[21] Bush Campaign [...] To Forge Church-Based Political Machine. Americans United, June 2 2004. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6692&abbr=pr&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241
[22] House steps into church-politics debate. USA Today, June 8 2004. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-06-08-church-politics_x.htm
[23] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Property Tax Exemptions. March 24, 1998. Page 51. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[24] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 56. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[25] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page iii. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[26] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 44. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[27] ibid. March 24, 1998. Page 55. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1998_year.html
[28] State of Oregon Department of Revenue Status of 1998 Audit Recommendations as Reported by State Agencies. November 17, 1999. http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/audreports/1999_year.html
[29] State Budget Shortfall Map http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/budgetmap.html

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Between April 11 and April 15 of 2004, I hosted an atheist table at Portland Community College in Portland, Oregon. This is an account of what I did, how I did it, and the response to what I did.

Getting the table was not difficult: I submitted the same paperwork that the religious groups on campus submit every other week of the year and my request was approved right away. I only asked for an hour a day for four days, due to other school obligations. Most religious groups have their tables out all day for weeks on end.

I spent about $40 printing some pamphlets I made. My pamphlets consisted of quotes from religious sources such as the Christian Bible and the Quran. The idea was that direct quotes from the source presented without comment would speak louder than any criticism I could offer. The quotes were gathered according to themes such as science, women, prophecies, etc. I also requested literature from atheist groups and several generously answered my request: Campus Freethought Alliance, Center for Inquiry, Council for Secular Humanism, and United States Atheists. I decided to keep the effort ‘ecumenical’ in that I wasn’t there representing any particular organization. By the end of the week I learned that the professionally published literature is taken more readily than the home-made photocopies, and that everyone loves stickers. I decorated a second-hand tablecloth with the word ATHEIST in large, black letters – no missing this table, no missing what this table was about (or so I hoped). PCC specifically forbids collecting personal information on campus, so I didn’t have a sign-up sheet as the Campus Freethought Alliance suggests. Nor did I primarily promote humanism rather than critique religion, as the CFA suggets. For this first effort on campus I want it to be clear that religion itself, not just particular groups or people or claims, was not exempt from criticism. I also set up a simple Web page for those who wanted to get or share more information.

Many people had questions about the atheist table. Some wanted to know if there was an official atheist club on campus, and what the club did. I said that there was not school-sponsored club because I knew that some students wouldn’t feel comfortable if their student activities fee went toward such a club. PCC offers up to $500 per group per year. There are at least five or six religious clubs on campus at all times, and no limit to the number of clubs that could exist. Two people said ‘but the Christian groups don’t hesitate in taking my money.’ I said that was a decision that PCC and the Christian groups made, and suggested they take it up with PCC and the Christians if they disapproved. I said many times that while there was no club, we did have a Web page and that I hoped in the future to either bring in or be a guest speaker on atheism, religion, church/state issues, and the like.

Some who stopped by the table had questions not about what I was offering but what I wasn’t offering. Why not have a separation of church and state table instead of an atheist table? Why aren’t there any pamphlets on creationism versus evolution? Why are there only pamphlets about Christianity and Islam, and not other religions? The general answer was that there was only so much I could do on this first attempt at an atheist table but all of these issues had relevant links and information at the Web site.

Some people had philosophical questions such as why we are here, where the first life came from, what happens when we die, whether or not there was a spiritual world, and ‘how do you live’ (which seemed to mean how can an atheist have ethics and a joy in living while remaining unconvinced by claims of God or an afterlife). I replied that I have read several theories as to how the earliest life appeared on Earth but I don’t consider myself versed enough in science to have a deep understanding of the subject, so I didn’t know for sure how life first formed. But I said it is more likely that there is a natural explanation than a supernatural one. Regarding ‘how I live’ I said I was not convinced by claims that there was an afterlife or a spiritual world or God. I said people can have the purpose they give themselves, and that can be its own reward. I have worked at a homeless shelter and as an American Sign Language interpreter for many years. I’ve taken classes on how to teach children with learning disabilities and how to be a better counselor. I am a member of Amnesty International and donate to charitable organizations. That’s some of ‘how I live’ without God.

A few people offered their unsolicited analysis about why I was hosting an atheist table. They said I must have had a bad experience with religion, or I must have never read the Bible, or I must have never really read the Bible, or I must have never had someone explain the Bible to me in just the right way. I replied that I had an entirely positive religious experience growing up, and that part of my religious upbringing was being encouraged to read the Bible. I started reading it as a child, and I have read from it ever since. The more I read, the more problems I find. Is it possible that the right explanation from the right explainer will make it all true again? It is possible, but I think it is very unlikely this will happen. Some claim atheism is obviously false because it claims to have ‘all the answers,’ but I suggest it is religion that has a one-size-fits-all answer (‘God did it’) and it is atheism that keeps asking questions.

People asked me what atheism was. I gave two answers: that atheism is what is left over when the claims of religion are found to be false, and that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural. The former explains why atheism is not ‘just another religion,’ the later explains what atheism is against. It might have been less confrontational to have a secular humanist table instead of an atheist table, but I confess I enjoyed tweaking the noses of the religious on campus. The worst I can say about them is I don’t believe their claims. Their holy books say I should be put to death (the Christians have Deuteronomy 13:6-10, the Muslims have Quran 2:191). I think they can stand a little confrontation.

I managed to distribute nearly all of the literature I had, but the experience wasn’t only one of being a teacher. I also learned from the experience. I learned there was a uniformity in how non-Christians perceived Christians: without exception, non-Christians spoke of Christians as liars and bullies. I was asked seven times if I was ‘serious,’ if I was really an atheist. I was asked this more than anything else. The reason why people asked if I was ‘serious’ was they thought the table was a trick by Christian. Five times I was asked if any Christians had harassed me yet. Christians are clearly are not viewed favorably on campus outside of their own circle. Non-Christians see Christians as people prone to misrepresent themselves to ‘win souls’ and to abuse those who disagree with them. I hope Christians reading this do not use this as evidence they are a persecuted group; being disliked is not evidence of being put down, and there may be entirely valid reasons for their being disliked. If anyone reading this who is not a Christian has thought in the past they were alone in mistrusting Christians, that they are in a critical minority, they might like to know that instead they are the majority. But it is a majority that has been deceived and bullied into silence.

The dislike and mistrust for Christians on campus was one thing I learned from hosting an atheist table. Another thing was how clearly divided Christians are in their behavior based on gender. Of those who identified themselves as Christians, wore Christian jewelry or carried Christian Bibles, the men and the women acted entirely differently. The Christian women both asked questions and gave answers. They spoke and listened to me and to other people at the table. The Christian men, however, were angry and condescending. I was told by the Christian men I ‘must live an empty life,’ that I ‘didn’t know what I was talking about,’ that I ‘should read the Bible before I quote from it,’ and more. Men also tended to exhibit a ‘rant and run’ behavior – they would bark out a comment or a judgment, sometimes in the middle of my listening to someone else, then literally run away. Sticking around to hear anything I had to say in reply was not in the cards for these Christian men. It was a man who asked the confusing question ‘Why are you pointing out all the things that are wrong in the Bible that are true anyway?’ It was a man who said that asking Christians to defend their claims, as I did in my pamphlets, was saying Christians are stupid. If the bad reputation of Christians is based in experience, I suggest it is Christian men and not Christian women who are to blame. No other categorization of Christians, such as age or ethnicity, was apparent.

A few Christians of both genders came to the table more than one day. And both a male and a female Christian gave the same reply to what turned out to be the most popular pamphlet I offered (see below). Regarding the fact that Jesus said that He would return and the world would end ‘soon’ (a ‘soon’ that came and went two thousand years ago), they said that a day to God was like a thousand years and a thousand years was like a day. Although one Christian mistakenly said this was a quote from Psalms, I found the quote in 2 Peter 3:8. The unknown author of 2 Peter references the letter of Jude, which was written around 80-100 CE. Thus the 1=1000 claim could only have been made after Jesus was already one or more generations late. In fact, the main point of 2 Peter Chapter 3 is to answer those who were asking, all the way back then, why Jesus hadn’t returned in their lifetimes as He had promised He would. People were asking if Jesus had lied (or been a lie) two thousand years ago. People are still asking today. But some aren’t asking anything: they just accept that when you put God into the picture, you don’t have to mean what you say or say what you mean. Jesus promised (thirty times or more!) to return within the lifetime of those who saw Him; He didn’t, but His followers claim He said that, He never lied, He is coming back, and somehow at the same time He is coming back two thousand years ago. Might all this confusion contribute to the perception that Christians are liars?

Based on conversations, repeat visits, and other signs of apparent interest it seems that my pamphlet questioning Christian prophecy was the most popular. It is possible that the topics presented in the pamphlets I offered were not the main reason people selected some and not others. Perhaps they picked up what was closest to them, or what was the most colorful. For whatever reason, here are the topics covered and how many of each pamphlet were taken:

Thirty Failed Prophecies: 28
The Bible Condones Slavery and Racism: 20
Women in the Bible: 16
Antisemitism in the Bible: 14
Papal-sanctioned Child Abuse: 10
Antisemitism from Martin Luther: 9
Fantastic Claims of Islam: 9
God Hates Homosexuality: 8
The Bible on the Origins of Life: 8
The Bible on the Origins of the Earth: 6

Only one person mentioned Islam at all (saying he had seen a table for an Islamic group before). Although there is no small Islamic presence on campus, no Muslim identified themselves to me, sought to understand what I was doing or challenge my claims. Nor was any other religion defended during this week. Instructors at PCC seemed to neither entirely avoid from nor come to the table: a few did each. It was only the Christians and those who have been cowed by the Christians who engaged me.

Some of those who came to the table were sympathetic but had concerns with atheism. One said ‘I understand the importance of the separation of church and state, but when they start banning Christmas in public grade school that’s going too far.’ I suggested that because not all religious holidays enjoy the same investment of tax dollars that celebrating Christmas was an instance of government establishment of religion and thus a violation of the First Amendment. One person said they liked what I was doing but ‘most people think atheism means evil’ (Devilishly, I said that’s why I did it). Another said I was just pushing my faith on other people: I reminded him that he came up to me and started the conversation, and that disbelieving the claims of religion was not a matter of faith.

A small number of people looked at the Web page. For all of four hours, there was a freethinker on campus that people could ask questions to and hear answers from. But what I value most out of the experience was the words of encouragement I got from the non-Christian majority who stopped by. Most of them appeared concerned about being seen talking to me but they each quietly said something nice. ‘Thank you for doing this!’ ‘I’m always trying to explain these things and it’s hard, can I take two pamphlets?’ ‘It’s good to see everyone get a chance, not just the religious groups.’ ‘I look forward to discussion with you.’ ‘This is great, I’m a recovering Catholic.’ ‘My boyfriend is an atheist.’ ‘This is interesting!’ Three people gave me the ‘thumbs up.’ And my favorite vote of confidence: ‘Good on you!’

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

for Ira Cohen

I
off to the beiad what ho for the Fayyum & Egyptian solitude. This yearning for renunciation out-seduces other Lesser lusts & becomes our secret vice our coenobitic luxe. Our athletic asceticism is crypto-aestheticism

our grottos

coat our grotesque bodies in mother-of-pearl we grow a few herbs nudge nudge & every day wink wink a raven arrives with a loaf of “bread.” The desert so monochromous to jaded urbanites offers auras & auroras to the

anchroritic eye

Our nothingness is a giant suck-hole

that

re-appropriates the world & our friends the devils

Little Anthony & the Temptations we succumb to every one of them

especially

the succulent succubus of dolce far niente

which the worldly call prayer.

II
Juice for Jesus

You yourself are a kind of food of love & love a kind of spiritual cannibalism – & not so totally spiritual for those whose taste in love runs to precious bodily fluids. Jesus is the juice of your genitalia your tears your underarm sweat et cetera music at best the sauce High Church Victoriana pompous as beeswax & ammonia.

Appetite

would never feed on itself if it could lick the dirt from your shoes. Real food is based on you like distant emanations from the Platonic kitchen

caviare

champagne

& other disgusting sacraments of the Libertine Gnostics

They laughed at Yeats because he never missed the dinner bell at Colle no matter how

entranced

with swans. Fools

the food of love is actually food.

III
Everyone talks about negative capability but nobody ever does anything about it

Every day

we cram ourselves with juicy disasters

planning

later to dry out our heads with whiffs of some bodhisattva’s farts

or Art

or ideology or shopping

hoping

to forget what the wise old elves always stage-whispered to me on the most radical afternoons of unreconstructed Summer

Psst! hey kid

come & eat clouds like us eat emptiness & feel the scintillating buzz the enticing somethingness of a rich

long-ago nothing that can hover in mid-air like a

dragonfly

or Jesus the water-bug.

IV Twelve Steps to Hell

1.
Abraham & Eggs
vaudeville duo advocating
the meltdown of monotheism
in a maelstrom sweet as treacle
Breakfast of heretics shed for me
blackpudding mushrooms kippers
rashers of bacon & lashings of tea
because it’s not what enters the mouth
that pollutes as the Borborites say
or pale Carpucrateans with their sacrament
of precious bodily fluids
but what comes out of it
language as puke

2.
The Sevenheaded Cobra demands
immediate re-paganization of the Abrahamic Traditions
or hostages will be shot
out of circus cannons & bounce
like swans in widespread nets
with Theosophical warps
& polymorphous wefts
too complex for even the most advanced
generation of military computers
to map with any degree of inaccurate
inaccessible mountain somewhere
in the almost Martian landscape
of Waziristan.

3.
Why should the Right monopolize
mystic runes groovy grafitti
skull-&-crossbones or the color black
Ice shelves of Arctic unreason
are melting melting
leaving behind
only a pair of red shoes such as
vegetarian spirits like to sport
hobgoblins haunting Europe
with nastly recrudenscence
of funkadelic thaumaturgy &
illiterate syncretism
the snakes cult to end all snake cults
return of the never quite sufficiently
repressed
in the form of goat panic terror
& shameless idolatry.

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

The Watchtower Society, also known as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, have predicted the end of the world no less than five times. According to their founder Charles Taze Russell, their second President J.E. Rutherford, and their official magazines The Watchtower and Awake!, the world was to end in 1914. But 1914 came and went without the world ending. So the date changed to 1915. But 1915 came and went without the world ending. So the date changed to 1918. But 1918 came and went without the world ending. So the date changed to 1925. But 1925 came and went without the world ending. So the date changed to 1975. But 1975 came and went without the world ending. So they stopped making public predictions about the end of the world and purged members (nearly 30,000 in 1978 alone) who questioned these false prophecies. Making failed predictions is a sure way to look stupid, but looking stupid isn’t so bad. Where the Watchtower Society really stands out is denying medical care for their children, based on fickle revelations from God to their leadership. Sometimes they ban medical procedures such as blood transfusions or organ transplants, sometimes they do not ban them – too bad if your child died while the ban was in effect. Maybe it wasn’t the end of the world, just the end of your child, that the Jehovah’s Witnesses were able to bring about.

THE WORLD WILL END IN 1914
“And, with the end of A.D. 1914, what God calls Babylon , and what men call Christendom, will have passed away, as is already shown from prophecy.” Charles Taze Russell, Studies In The Scriptures, Vol. III
“…we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914″ Charles Taze Russell, The Finished Mystery.

NO, WAIT, THE WORLD WILL END IN 1915
“In the coming 26 years [1889+25], all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved.” Charles Taze Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. II
“The Gentile Times prove that the present governments must all be overthrown about the close of A.D. 1915.” Charles Taze Russell, The Time Is At Hand.

NO, WAIT, THE WORLD WILL END IN 1918
“… in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of Christianity.” The Finished Mystery (1917 edition).

NO, WAIT, THE WORLD WILL END IN 1925
“… there will be a resurrection of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and other faithful ones of old … we may expect 1925 to witness the return of these faithful men of Israel from the condition of death, being resurrected and fully restored to perfect humanity and made the visible, legal representatives of the new order of things on earth… Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection.” J.E. Rutherford, Millions Now Living Will Never Die.
“Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that (Christ) did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable… We understand that the jubilee type began to count in 1575 B.C.; and the 3,500 year period embracing the type must end in 1925… It follows, then, that the year 1925 will mark the beginning of the restoration of all things lost by Adam’s disobedience.” J.E. Rutherford, The Watchtower, November 1 1922
“Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge.” The Watchtower, April 1 1923

NO, WAIT, THE WORLD WILL END IN 1975
“[...] according to reliable Bible chronology Adam was created in the year 4026 BCE, likely in the autumn of the year, at the end of the sixth day of creation.” [...]  “According to reliable Bible chronology, Adam and Eve were created in 4026 BCE.” [...] “Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ… Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth.” The Watchtower April 1, 1968; Awake! October 8, 1968; The Watchtower August 15, 1968.

BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS FORBIDDEN!
Watchtower September 15 1961 pp. 563-564
Watchtower February 15 1964 pp. 127-8

BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS NOT FORBIDDEN!
Watchtower November 15 1964 pp. 680-3
Watchtower June 15 2000 p. 31

ORGAN TRANSPLANT FORBIDDEN!
Watchtower November 15 1967 pp. 702-4
Awake! June 8 1968 p. 21

ORGAN TRANSPLANT NOT FORBIDDEN!
Watchtower March 15 1980 p. 31

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)

Those Mormons sure are friendly. But are they friendly to all of God’s children? The following quotations from Nephi, Jacob, and Alma are from the Book of Mormon. In modern editions of the Book of Mormon the word ‘white’ (skin) is often changed to ‘pure’ (character); the original text is quoted here. As the Book of Mormon is said to be inspired by God, dictated by angels and faithfully transcribed by Joseph Smith, any modern changes are less accurate than these original quotes. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Bruce McConkie, Mark Peterson and Orson Pratt were or are all leaders of the LDS. African-American men were not allowed to be clergy in the LDS until 1978, nor were African-American men allowed to lead LDS Boy Scout troops. Like the Mormon revelation that polygamy was not to be practiced on Earth (only in Heaven), the revelations to white-wash the Book of Mormon and allow African-American leadership came at exactly the same time as human discontent (and lawsuits) arose against them. What a miracle!

• And the angel said unto me: Behold these [Native Americans] shall dwindle in unbelief. And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations. – 1 Nephi 22:23
• And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain. – 1 Nephi 13:15
• And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities. And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done. And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey. – 2 Nephi 5:21:24
• And then shall they [Native Americans] rejoice; for they shall know that it is a blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people. – 2 Nephi 30:6
• Behold, the Lamanites [Native Americans] your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father – that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them. [...] O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. [...] Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers. – Jacob 3:5,8-9
• And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men. [...] And this was done that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren, that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction. [...] And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed. – Alma 3:6,9
• “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species and put them on a national equalization.” – Joseph Smith
• “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” – Brigham Young
• “…after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representation a upon a the earth as well as God… ” – John Taylor
• “The negroes are not equal with other races when the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned [...] As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the negroes [...] Cain, Ham, and the whole negro race have [been] cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry.” – Bruce McConkie
• “At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the negroes we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that He placed a dark skin upon them as a curse – as a punishment and as a sign to all others. [...] If there is one drop of negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn’t any argument, therefore, as to intermarriage with the Negro, is there? Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest kind of education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it.” – Mark Peterson
• “The Lord has not kept them in store for five or six thousand years past, and kept them waiting for their bodies all this time to send them among the Hottentots, the African Negroes, the idolatrous Hindoos, or any other of the fallen nations of the earth.” – Orson Pratt

(from OVO 16 ANTICHRIST January 2006)