Posts Tagged religious hypocrisy
People who are against abortion usually label themselves as pro-lifers or “pro-life”. Pro-lifers, in turn, are almost always Conservatives who vote for politicians and policies that favor and help wealthy entities so they can enrich themselves at the backs of the poor and middle class wage earners, while having manipulated their voter base, that mostly consists of poor and middle class wage earners, to subscribe to bullshit bootstraps narratives and other associated Gordon Gecko prosperity dribble.
The real problem arises because Conservatives categorically vote against social safety net programs that lend a helping hand to people who cannot afford to properly provide for, oh, I don’t know, the children they were just forced to have.
A social safety net program may include anything from minimum wage laws, union representation to welfare checks. Pro-lifers are categorically opposed to a host of social safety net programs aimed at keeping the middle class strong and prosperous, instead of weakened and exploited.
The pro-life advocates are the same people who vote against unions – which are in place to protect workers against exploitative employers; they are the same people who vote for giving the wealthy and corporations tax breaks they do not need at the expense of the middle class, which then will have to pick up their slack; these are the same people who vote against proper safety standards on the job and unemployment/disability benefits; they are the people who vote against increasing the minimum wage and providing everyone with affordable, proper access to health care regardless of their employment status. These are the people who think people aren’t entitled to food!!
The thing is, when you, for example, vote against unions, fair wages and benefits and thus take away a person’s ability to protect themselves against their employer, or when you subscribe to the notion that people aren’t entitled to food, then not only are you not “pro-life”, but you render people vulnerable to a host of exploits and abuses by their employers, thus ultimately leaving them unable to properly provide for themselves and their families, including the baby you just forced them to have.
When you do not have protection on the job and become subject to a host of exploitative tactics by your employer. without any avenues of recourse available to you to protect against such exploitation, you slide down and eventually end up needing assistance too.
Note how these things are interconnected: when you vote against unions, fair wages, overtime laws and so forth, you help create more poverty, which then results in people having to rely on welfare programs that you voted against as well.
Despite these realities, one will, however, be hard pressed to find a so-called pro-lifer who would vote for social safety-net programs such as unions.
What they do want to do is be able to shame and coerce a woman into giving birth to a child she does not want to have, under the guise of love, god and reverence for life. After having shamed and coerced said woman to give birth to a child she does not want to have/cannot afford, they then refuse to vote for policies that would allow that woman to properly provide for said child.
That anti-abortionists would call themselves pro-life is both ironic and deeply hypocritical because their position is anything but pro-life as they merely want a child to be born, but not fed, or educated, or clothed, or housed, because doing so would require prioritizing and funding social-safety net programs instead of defunding and de-prioritizing them to subsidize corporations, the wealthy, banks and oil companies – thus effectively siphoning and redistributing wealth from the bottom to the top under the guise of The American Dream, hard work and other such prosperity gospels.
To be clear, wanting a child to be born but then not giving a damn what happens to it once it is out of the womb is unequivocally not pro-life but, it is, in fact, hostile to life. Theirs is a position that is pro-birth and there is a chasm of a difference.
We need to really think about, and ask ourselves, what the morality of the pro-life position is and who in this debate really has the welfare of people in mind; who the entity is that respects agency – which is related to acknowledging a person’s (in this case a woman’s) consent, boundaries, and autonomy – and which entity does not, thus resulting in women being dehumanized by being repeatedly robbed off their ability to consent and set boundaries and maintain autonomy over their own bodies, including their reproduction and family planning.
A 36-year-old Puerto Rican nursing assistant who did not want to reveal her last name and only went by the name Maddy was the only minority on the six-person jury who opposed the “not guilty” verdict of George Zimmerman. She admitted she was the juror who originally wanted to convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder, but eventually realized that the evidence supposedly didn’t support a guilty verdict with respect to his claim of self-defense.
“I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end,” she said. “That’s where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it. But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can’t say he’s guilty.”
She continued, “as much as we were trying to find this man guilty…they give you a booklet that basically tells you the truth, and the truth is that there was nothing that we could do about it. I feel the verdict was already told.”
However, as a mother of eight children, Maddy said she wonders if she made the right decision and feels like she owes Martin’s parents an apology.
“It’s hard for me to sleep, it’s hard for me to eat because I feel I was forcefully included in Trayvon Martin’s death. And as I carry him on my back, I’m hurting as much Trayvon’s Martin’s mother because there’s no way that any mother should feel that pain,” she said.
Here is what I have to say to “Maddy”:
1) The road to hell, since you are a believer in god’s law and Jesus and all that crap, is paved with good intentions.
2) It seems to me almost like the legal team and all were trying to intimidate the jurors by throwing that “book of truth” as she calls it, at them, confusing them with a bunch of legal jargon and manipulating them into a non guilty verdict. In other words, the defense and all gamed the system and engaged in a lot of manipulation to coerce and shame the jury into a non-guilty verdict citing “the law” and “procedures” to these clearly uneducated dolts. As she she said, she knew he was guilty but was basically talked out of it. This illustrates the degree to which our legal system is divorced from justice.
If the legal process was improperly enforced by the court and state due to incompetence or something worse, this does not change the fact that this jury, including god fearing “Maddy” OK’d vigilantism against a young black man.
3) This trial was never about proving Zimmerman’s guilt, it was about trying to prove why Trayvon Martin deserved to be shot.
4) As the law states, an aggressor cannot use self defense. Zimmerman was the aggressor because he was the one who left his car, despite dispatch telling him to stay in, and he was the one who stalked the boy who had no idea who Zimmerman was and probably thought he was gonna get mugged or else attacked by Zimmerman. So Trayvon defended him himself, not the other way around.
5) Apparently Zimmerman standing his ground was ok, but Martin doing the same thing was not and he deserved to die.
6) A 17-year old teenager who walked around with candy and was unarmed got killed and the jury really believed that it was not the fault of the person who stalked and murdered him and thus at least deserving of a manslaughter verdict.
7) “Maddy” knew what the right thing to do was, she is admitting that Zimmerman got away with murder, but she still went ahead and found him not guilty. “Maddy” could have voted any way she wanted. No gun was at her head. That she chose to vote for acquittal, due to coercion and/or intimidation by other juror, is ultimately on her. She can’t blame anyone else or anything else. She alone stands to blame with regards to there not having been a hung jury.
8) “You cant get away from god“? That has got to be dumbest and most hypocritical load of shit I have heard anyone say thus far in this case. How fucking convenient.
I love it how religious people try to excuse their own bad behavior and bad, immoral, detrimental decisions by stating that hey, if I was a terrible person and let a murderer get away, it’s ok, god will take care of it. That she actually had the nerve to come back and state that Zimmerman will be the one facing his maker, like she had nothing to do with the outcome, is the height of hypocrisy.
Way to not take responsibility for your own actions, “Maddy”, and instead bet on god taking care of something you should have taken care of yourself. Guess what, honey bunch, there is no god, and no one will punish Zimmerman. He racially profiled, stalked and murdered a black boy and got away with it because you let him go. It wasn’t your god or Jesus, it was you. But let me tell you one thing, if there was indeed a god, Zimmerman would not be the only one facing him. You would be standing right next to him.
I have absolutely no sympathy for her and hope she has an eternity of rotten nights of no sleep because of it.
Finally, I would like to point out that there are two kinds of evil in the world: people who do evil things and people who see evil being done and do nothing about it. “Maddy” falls into the latter category. See, she had a choice and she chose to let him go. Her confession and remorse after the fact are absolutely meaningless.
Effective today, I have decided to no longer post any anti-religious posts or incorporate criticism of religion – partially or in its entirety, into my blog. While I will allow comments that are critical of religion – as I strongly believe in the first Amendment and no censorship – I will not engage in such behavior myself.
I am renouncing my atheism.
A few strange occurrences have occurred this Easter weekend – especially after I published my blog entry on the how Easter has nothing to do with Christ – that have led me to seriously question my sentiments towards religion.
Of course, I would be the first person to deny the existence of miracles and the supernatural but this was real and it made me question my stance to the point of being ready to renounce it.
I have always said that atheists are open minded and ready as well as willing to amend and change their views when facts call for it. That nothing is set in stone. This is one of those moments.
That is still true. Not that it ultimately matters now that I have come to be a believer and won’t need to hold on to such a view of skepticism anymore. But I want you to know that I have not decided to renounce my ways as an atheist based on fairy tales, but based on first hand witnessing of things I never thought possible.
In a later entry I will describe in detail what those things entailed. But, as a former skeptic, trust me when I say that it was significant enough for me to renounce atheism. You have to believe me because that is what blind faith is all about.
I have finally come to understand the grave error of my ways as a “skeptic” (in real I was just a fool blinded by my ignorance and arrogance about god, not a skeptic) and realized before I can sit down and fully divulge the entirety of my claim and experiences that have led me to change my views, I need to let you, my readers, know that I am changed. I have changed.
I allowed facts and science to get in the way of the One true love. I let reason and fact-based knowledge guide my decisions and actions in life instead of the word of god. And for that I am sorry.
I was arrogant to believe that the entire billion galaxy universe wasn’t just created for us and doesn’t revolve around us. I understand now and want you all to know that I deeply regret my ways.
I hope you continue to follow me as I undertake this journey of awakening and rebirth to become the person god wanted me to be instead of the skeptic I have become. And I do hope that maybe one day, you will do the same.
Given that none of the Christmas traditions observed have anything to do with Jesus or Christianity; given that Jesus – if he existed – wasn’t even born in December and given that Christmas is a totally pagan holiday co-opted by religious people, seeing a billboard like that gives new meaning to the notion head in the sand and willful ignorance.
I am also certain that given all the shit that is going on in this world – wars, oppression, hunger, poverty and the myriad of horrible things us blessed human beings, god’s children, do to one another – the last thing Jesus would be bothered by is that we do not wish each other “Merry Christmas“. Then again, given the hypocrisy of most religious people, this is the exact kind of billboard you would expect to see from such pious followers, so in a way they are actually pretty consistent and this billboard spot on.
Religious people and hypocrites everywhere care a lot about decorum and politeness, lending a civilized veneer to the sinister reality and ruinous worldviews they advocate.