Song Lyrics: “Take Me To Church” by Hozier

Take Me To Church” by Hozier

My lover’s got humor

She still giggle at a funeral

Knows everybody’s disapproval

Should’ve worshipped her sooner

If the heavens ever did speak

She’s the last true mouthpiece

Every Sunday is getting more bleak

Fresh poison each week

We were born sick, you heard them say

My church offers no absolutes

Tells me worship in the bedroom

The only heaven I’ll be sent to

Is when I’m alone with you

I was born sick, but I love you

Mend me to be well

A-men, amen, amen

Take me to church

I’ll worship like a dog at the shrine of your light

I’ll tell you my sins, and you can sharpen your knife

Offer me that deathless stare, good god

Let me give you my life

Take me to church

I’ll worship like a dog at the shrine of your light

I’ll tell you my sins, and you can sharpen your knife

Offer me that deathless stare, good god

Let me give you my life

If I’m a pagan of the good time

My lovers is sunlight

Keep the goddess on my side

See the mantle sacrifice

Drain the whole sea

It’s some shiny

Something meaty for the main course

That’s a fine looking high horse

What you got in the stable

We the lot of starving faithful

That looks tasty

That looks plenty

This is hungry work

Take me to church

I’ll worship like a dog at the shrine of your light

I’ll tell you my sins, and you can sharpen your knife

Offer me that deathless stare, good god

Let me give you my life

Take me to church

I’ll worship like a dog at the shrine of your light

I’ll tell you my sins, and you can sharpen your knife

Offer me that death-less stare, good god

Let me give you my life

The Bible Reloaded on YouTube

biblereloaded

In my Internet wanderings I came upon a rather interesting YouTube channel
hosted by Jake & Hugo called The Bible Reloaded.”

They take a unique approach in how to use their channel in the ambitious
attempt to read the narrative of the entire Bible (NIV) on the Internet.
Not only this but most importantly they provide context for the topics
they raise and even have done a video outside of canonical texts to
provide further context still.

This ongoing project has caught my attention and is a worth a look.

Episode 1: Genesis

If You Want To Be Friends With Everyone…

My Political Science professor gave our class a piece of solid wisdom that I like to repeat when confronted with the “can’t we all get along” mentality in myself and others:

If you want to be friends with everyone then there are three topics to avoid at all costs: politics, religion and sex.”

Takes all the fun out of everything if you ask me, but it is a very true maxim to follow if your goal to only to have everyone be your buddy.

One of those three topics will get someone’s goat. Rest assured.

I like to let people guess what the three things are when I bring this up in conversation. Everyone always gets “politics” and “religion” but almost everyone struggles with the third topic. We all can see with even minimal life experience that politics and religion fiercely divide people into rigid battle lines, but most don’t readily think of sex as divisive.

Keep in mind it is “sex” and not “love” on our list here. Talking about love rarely irks anyone, but change that to sexual acts and the game changes with it.

Aside from simple prudishness, discussing sex openly and frankly almost always opens up a door for another person to think you are either trying to brag or trying to gross them out.

The key element to understand is that it really doesn’t matter exactly what you have to say about the ‘dangerous trio’ in order to piss someone off with your words. You can be ‘pro’ and not ‘anti’ toward any of these topics and still some people will take offense.

Which brings me to why I’ll just give people my opinion and give it to them straight. Be it on the Internet or in a far less digital context. No matter what I say, someone is pissed that I said it.

So while I could and should take ever greater care to not just beat people over the head my opinions and observations, I also realize the only way to get everyone to “get along” with me is to shut up about the majority of the topics that interest me. Which I find unacceptable.

We as a human race need to disagree, we need to be of different minds and different faiths and different attitudes. It is vital to our growth as individual people and as a larger society to come to terms with the fact that we cannot see eye to eye. Coming to understand the alternative perspective, more often than not, only enhances and strengthens our own understandings.

But much of the value of such exchanges comes from a mutual desire on both sides to understand the other. When one or both sides is only interested in confirming their beliefs all value is lost, and you have yourself a good old fashion shouting match.

Politics stands out a bit from the other two, mainly in that political positions that are not sourced in facts are always hogwash. Every time without fail. But both sex and religion one can be more loose and nonspecific while still making valid points. Religion far more than sex because it relies on “faith” which is the very definition of a lack of logical context forming a belief.

People sometimes mistake me for a fighter, someone who gets off on kicking dirt around. But that is not quite right. I’m highly attracted to polemics and controversy, but it’s not my primary focus of my daily thoughts and musings.

I take zero satisfaction out of smashing an opponent to pieces completely unchallenged on my logic in a debate. It is not even a victory in my mind. I was looking, in all such cases, for a tit-for-tat and not the debate equivalent of a bulldozer running over a daisy. Without a challenge of some sort I end up just feeling bad for having engaged in debate with a person who can’t muster an argument without falling into every single logical fallacy known to man.

Repost: The Tragedy at Fort Hood

1109_fthoodbh

(Image: PBS.org)

The tragedy at Fort Hood had nothing to do with religion. No matter what some Muslim-hater says.

The tragedy at Fort Hood cannot be properly termed that this point an act of terrorism. No matter what some fear-monger says.

Jon Soltz, of VoteVets.org, appearing on Alan Colmes Radio agrees with me that saying such unfounded statements about this tragedy is completely disrespectful to the fallen.

Those equating this incident with terrorism are an insult to this nation.

The raw truth of this, is that this was a mass murder by a highly-unstable person.

My heart goes out to all those who lost loved ones in this senseless violence. The nation mourns your loss.

I find it unfortunate in the extreme that unethical broadcasters like Bill O’Reilly use this horrific mass murder on a U.S. Army base to spread the Politics of Fear in the nation.

This was a senseless killing of Americans by a deranged individual.

Media Hate-Profiteers may say otherwise, but care nothing for following the facts and care everything for spreading anti-Islamic sentiment while promoting baseless public fear.

At this stage, to call this anything but a mass murder of co-workers by a disturbed individual is purely motivated by a divisive political motive, and the attachment to the issue of the shooter’s religion or ethnicity is motivated purely by the motives of hatred for others based on creed or faith.

I find it a shame that we have a corrupt Media-giant promoting the Politics of Fear and the Politics of Hate under the guise of the credibility of a news group.

I find it a shame that some people have such unethical practices and then claim the title of “journalist,” as Bill O’Reilly does.

Former-Evangelical Frank Schaeffer Speaks Out

frank_schaeffer

Frank Schaeffer

“In my evangelical days I would have said: ‘Well if you are not in the church I belong to you’ll be lost, maybe burn in hell forever.’ I don’t think that way anymore.”

“A certain type of certainty that writes off other people based on the fact you may disagree with their interpretation of some theological or philosophical idea is just crazy. And it‘s crazy for this reason: It’s got nothing to do with peace and love. It‘s crazy practically. Look, we are like ants–our view of the universe is like ants on a roadside watching passing traffic. We live a few years, we read a few books, we draw a few conclusions, we try to love the people around us and we are gone. Anybody who can stand up in the middle of this process and say ‘I am absolutely know I’m right about something’ I think is hooked into a kind of deadly uncertainty that simply can‘t exist.”


I could not agree with Schaeffer more in regards to the true harm in fundamentalist belief structures.

This “deadly uncertainty” is my only issue with the religious right.

There has to be some room for doubt or else you can justify the worst of crimes as simple religious practice.

In my view absolutes are weakness, and allowing for consideration is an element of true strength.

book_patience_with_god

Bill O’Reilly versus Joan Walsh

YouTube Video of The Debate

“This Tiller thing is bogus. And I think you know it‘s bogus. And if not I‘m gonna show you a sound byte that‘s gonna prove it to you.”

How many sound bytes do you have to show people to fix what they read in textbooks and newspapers?

If it’s in the Constitution, he has a sound byte for that. No need to read it yourself.

If it’s the truth of ideology that he claims to hold and only perverts and twists to his own ends, he has a sound byte for that. No need to speak to the people involved.

If he promotes domestic terrorism via lies about Americans and invasions of privacy in his ‘just crusade,’ he has a sound byte for that. No need to look at reality.

He has a sound byte ready for the day he starts getting right down to it and promoting violence against liberals and terrorism on the city of San Francisco. And another one ready as they fit him for an orange jumpsuit.

All of it to carefully explain away why he is not at fault, ever, and has nothing to do with anything except the so-called ‘truth.’ All it to make sure nobody in his audience ever actually reads anything except what he tells them to.

To me, this is proof of what I’ve always said about Bill O’Reilly:

This man cares nothing for facts and only for own personal set of biases.

 

The O’Reilly Tactic of Dirty Pool Debate revealed one of his trademark spin artist moves in the opening moments of this clip.

Bill’O brings up as a side-line, and states himself very quickly, in mentioning what Joan wrote on her website was “unconscionable” and then says he is going to “stick to it” by addressing the matter at hand.

This is classic Dirty Pool Debate. You slander your opponent and before they get a chance to respond then quickly you move to the ’real issue at hand.’ The whole point of Dirty Pool Debate is to demean the character of your opponent instead of argue the point with them.

Bill O’Reilly is a master at doing just this. Keeping the truth of a real debate away from his audience and helping them maintain narrow-minded thinking while feeling like they are ‘learning’ about politics, media and the nation.

Just screaming like an idiot into the camera and refusing the recognize the damage he does to society at large with this brand of partisan hate and untruthful propaganda on serious social issues in America.

Joan: “You crusaded against him.”

Bill: “You bet!”

Joan: “He had been shot twice already.”

Bill: “And I‘m sorry about that.”

Well if he was so sorry why didn’t he stop slandering and misusing his platform to spread lies about Americans that ultimately lead to domestic terrorism incidents?

Because that would have hurt his ratings. Oh, the precious ratings.

He should be sorry. He is the one with blood on his hands, after all.

What Bill O’Reilly does on television is wrong. It is a brutal set of lies and conjecture that provides no benefit to the nation whatsoever. FOX Broadcasting Studios should be ashamed to have their name attached to such a disreputable and dishonest man.

 

The need to scream over all that disagrees with your mentality is a clear example of partisanship and intolerance for the opinions of others.

The need to call everyone not aligned with you as “far left“is a clear example of a need to marginalize your opponent because you feel your own position is weak or lacking against theirs.

Considering conservatives are on the wrong side of history in every debate over social issues I can see why Bill O’Reilly is so threatened to use such shallow and childish tactics.

Joan is absolutely right about Bill O’Reilly being a vile man. A vile and lowly man who loves his ideologies more than he loves other humans.

He disrespects the nation and the intelligence of his audience with his so-called ‘facts’ and his so-called ‘reporting.’

Time and time again it is the true patriots who must stand up against the charlatans and propagandists who seek to destroy this nation in violence and ignorance.

Let our voices be heard, loud.

A domestic terrorist is in our amidst: Bill O’Reilly. A man who promotes vigilantism and misinformation that gets Americans killed.

Bigots Against Islam Run The Republican Party

The hatred of others based on their faith is the favored tactic of the Anti Obama Republicans in this current political climate. If this hatred was directed at another religion the whole of the American public would reject this bigotry as unpatriotic and down right sick. This propaganda and lies about Islamic faith is tolerated by Republicans because many Americans chose to believe lies, such as the misnomer that the majority of Muslims are in fact terrorists, in place of speaking with their fellows whom may be more directly connected to the truth of the matter than a pack of lying pundits.

Racism against Arabs and bigotry against Islam seems perfectly acceptable to millions of Americans, while racism against Blacks and bigotry against Christians or Jews is downright unacceptable. These Republican Americans and their conservative counterparts seem to believe that civil rights extend only to certain colors and certain faiths.

These disrespectful and partisan Americans put into question their dedication to the principals of non-discrimination in our society. Until major representatives of the Republican Party denounce this bigotry and racism in their ranks they remain in my mind a continued threat to peace and national security in the United States of America.

People Who Voted McCain Hate Obama, Big Surprise

I follow politics on both sides of the coin.

In my view the turning point for the McCain Campaign was the selection of Sara Palin.

The Thinking Conservatives removed their support in droves while the Limited Conservatives found a new poster-child for Partisan Logic.

Aside from the racism allowed to crop up in the Republican Campaign and the market crash under a Republican President, the Conservative Americans who actually think about their positions for longer than the span of a thirty second sound byte could not accept the ‘Say it so, Joe’ Logic and the overall presentation of John McCain’s pick for VP.

Many asked themselves and openly begged the question:

“If John McCain made this bad a decision for Vice President, then how can we trust him to make the right decisions on the war on terror.”

I am trying to draw a connection between the Obama-Hate Committee found on right wing radio and FOX Broadcasting with the vague demagogue figure of religious and moral authority found in the Governor of Alaska and her bid for the vice-presidency in 2008.

I think this group is just loud, and well-funded. Most, if not all, popularity of extremist presidential bashing from the Media Republicans comes from people who want theocracy and the destruction of American Liberty in the name of unfounded ideologies.

There are of course exceptions and a rare pack of conservatives can formulate a fair review of the Obama Presidency thus far, but they increasingly move into the minority as Media Hacks and Partisan Pundits rule the conservative-media.

Talking About God and Science

An anonymous man once impressed this image upon my mind:

I was doing one of these things awhile back and there was this guy in the room with a huge chip on his shoulder as soon as I said the word ‘God.’ This guy was huge, almost seven feet tall and arms like a gorilla. He told me there wasn’t no such thing as God and on top of that since nobody in the room could do a damn thing about him that he was God as far as it mattered. So I put a challenge to him. I emptied out a dresser, moved it out into the center of the room, and had everyone help me fill the bottom drawer with all the training weights we could. Then I told him to lift it up high. He struggled and moved it around more than I thought he would. But he couldn’t get it off the ground. Then we had everyone in the room, with him, try and lift the dresser. It came up from the floor so easily we almost hurt ourselves, surprised at our mutual strength. When we all sat down again after replacing the dresser and the weights he asked me what was the point. I told him that when he walked in that door today he thought he was God and now he can see that some things are outside his power. The God in everyone else with himself included was stronger than he could ever hope to be alone. So he was not God. But God was still present in the room, between all of us and stronger than any of us.

If you change the physical nature of this image of the huge man proclaiming himself “God” for a more intellectual design, one might evoke an image of a high-brow scholar scribbling out a formula that disproves the existence of God.

This is my impression of many atheists, and certain agonistics, I encounter. It seems to me that many have ‘thought God out of existence’ in the course of earnest and worthwhile studies. To my perception all science, and the nature of all knowledge itself, provides us with a constant ’unknown.’ Even in the absence of any religious background there is more than enough room for an understanding of the universe and life beyond simple reasoning’s of black-and-white logic.

While science shatters dogma and begs the eternal question simultaneously, it still does not negate the concept of a higher power.

Has America Gone Conspiracy-Crazy?

It has been my observation that popular websites and radio shows have experienced a recent increase in the number of people touting the “New World Order Theory” (NWO) or an apocalyptic theory that includes global conspiracies in one fashion or another. I am not a fan of dismissive attitudes and rather than mocking these people I wish to explain why I personally do not subscribe to these theories even after having reviewed much of the same media and materials that they often use as evidence for their theory.
—————————————————————————————————–
http://www.coasttocoastam.com
http://www.jordanmaxwell.com
—————————————————————————————————–
There is no doubt that there remains a large divide in society between the labor classes and the aristocratic classes of people, no matter how wealthy or advanced a society is. As many have written on throughout history there is a mutual disgust shared between these classes.

The labor class most often views the other as uncaring and immoral. The aristocratic class most often views the other as uncivil and illogical.

The clever, and usually fiendish, use this divide on both sides of society to promote their personal agenda. Be it selling DVDs, seeds, books, survival supplies or perhaps gaining ratings, website hits and sponsors the issue of interjecting mass fear without any tangible proof is reprehensible. Not to mention the fact that both modern and ancient politicians have sought to demonize one group or another using these same existing prejudices in what is commonly called class-warfare.

I assert that the entire idea of a “grand-puppeteer council” that rules all of humanity is a form of ancient social-engineering, if you will, developed perhaps some time prior to the Roman Empire. An agenda formed purely to destabilize all forms of government in a time when there was no such thing as democracy or equality under the law for any person not of a ruling class.

I believe the labor class of old created this entire theory around the strange practices of aristocrats that still exist in today’s society in the form of the Skull and Bones Society or other ritualistic practices in society as a whole. The unseen and unknown rulers of all cannot be proven nor disproved. Nor can the shadow regime be seen for it is made of no light that we pathetic laborers can find with the blindfolds that our masters provide. It is a perfect circle of plausible yet improvable concepts leading to the same conclusion of rejecting all the institutions of government as purely evil.

I see certain figures like Jordan Maxwell as not motivated by sheer profiteering motives but rather simply a person who has read more material and done more research than I have, by far, yet he has not considered this simple concept while reading many occult materials. Maxwell is one of the rare exceptions in this subject where he is genuine and earnest about his fears for America coming under some form of global-control. I just simply disagree and obviously I would be proven wrong if such a thing were to happen outside of popular fiction.

I am not certain if America is falling prey to an age-old agenda of anarchistic motives or if a certain few have simply become voiced after being silent but the issues of the press failing to do their job in the modern world or the multitude of other arguments used to promote these theories don’t provide any proof for the theory itself.

No doubt someone who believes strongly in these theories would seek to call me a “NWO shill” and I am trying to convey that I see Alex Jones, for instance, as a profiteering shill. Let people judge for themselves as I make zero dollars on this weblog and Jones runs advertisements for his products on the radio. George Noory would be the converse of Jones where he appears to simply believe in the NWO while further proving my point that Jones is primarily motivated by profit due to fact that Noory doesn’t engage in schemes to sell documentaries yet is still affiliated with and outspoken on the issue.

Many theories defy evidence, like Creationism for instance, and there are many people of varying degrees of study who wish to establish a sense of complete authority on these theories making them into supposed facts. It is the very nature of spreading willful ignorance. Some issues do not have all the standards of scientific proof at this time and must be handled as such.

The answer is, we don’t have the answer. Anyone who tells you otherwise should called into suspect immediately to produce proof or be called to state themselves as a person of convictions and not facts, which is perfectly acceptable.

I am not here to be throwing out names for everyone to repeat of my ‘perfect’ theories or just to start an uproar on any of the issues I’ve touched on but rather to say that when any person simply accepts what they hear, see or read as proof-enough for them that ultimately we all could suffer the consequences if this were to become systemic.

Eric Lightborn
February 17th 2009

Cast The First Stone

You may hear those of good-nature and even many secular-types say this:

“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

While the message is of the highest importance to us as a people I believe much of this is lost in the changes of how we speak and write and even think in this modern world. The language of our forefathers resonates with some but not with most.

So the greatest of messages of our history are lost to time and to society. I am about to use a modern version of that common quote and I don’t want to be accredited but rather want you to use this on someone to make a better impression if ever in the situation where you might say the line above.

————————————————

“Let the perfect person among you throw the first stone.”

————————————————

Sin’ is not’ in’ if that makes sense to you at all. The word itself has almost no weight, at least compared to the centuries prior. ‘Perfect’ however is something that anyone can wrap their head around in terms of something that no one actually has about them as is the idea that we are all with some element of imperfection about us no matter what we do. The concepts of Original Sin and the Fallibility of Man were so common in the past that they were assumed to be understood in many messages.

I am only attempting to show why we keep missing the message in this national discussion of gay-rights, same-sex marriage and equality under the law.


Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 26th 2008