Tag Archives: modern

Precepts of Moderate Religiosity

Posted on by
Reply

Praying too little means you’re probably only praying when you need something.

Praying too much is disrespectful. You should pray more than you need to but less than you “have to.”

Make it special for Godsake!

Religion and edifying spirituality is the salt of the earth, not the dirt; it should not be everywhere all the time.

Turn the other cheek so the second punch misses.

It’s better to shop for churches than to go to just one.

All of the world’s Holy Books have many edifying qualities, and many, many stupid parts as well. See, ya gotta keep shopping.

It’s possible Jesus and others have been apotheosized into someone super-supernatural. But it’s a certainty that none of the Advanced Aliens believe in him. They might have their own. Point is, if any earthly entity has become godlike, its only in these parts. Not Andromeda. Those Crab Nebulans aren’t preaching our gospels, and why should they? ‘You gonna send a whole nebula to Hell?

The concept of hell need not be abandoned, just radically downsized. Hell is surgery not needless suffering. It makes things better or else God wouldn’t have made it. But its probably surgery without anaesthesia, so watch out.

The parts where Jesus sounds like a hippie are the best parts. But that still doesn’t make being a hippie the right way to go.

“This church is the only true one” is virus code.

Be fruitful and multiply has become virus code. It used to be good and therefore holy. But that was then.

The fruit by which ye shall know them is when they forbid you to look at the rest of the garden and they talk shit about it. That’s when you know your fruit has gone bad. And all fruit go bad.

That’s why you gotta keep shopping.

Homosexuality Is Fine But What About Sodomy?

Posted on by
Reply

First, let me say that if I could wave a magic wand and make every man in the world except me gay, I would do it (as long as I didn’t look too gay waving a magic wand) because then I might finally get some female attention. And a decent haircut.

And if I could wave a magic wand and make every woman bi-sexual, I’d probably do that too.

So don’t call me anti-gay. Some of my best friends’ acquaintances are gay.

Also, I have nothing against the culture and personality-types commonly associated with homosexuality. In fact, I don’t think many heterosexual guys who saw Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady singing “Why Can’t Women Be More Like Men?” thought to themselves:  “What the hell is he talking about it?”

Then again, not too many heterosexual men have sat through the entirety of My Fair Lady. Not unless they were pussy-whipped into doing so.

“You will watch My Fair Lady and you will like it!”  “Yes dear.”  “And we will dance all night!”  “By dance all night, you mean sex?”  “No!”  “Yes dear…”

Now that I’ve insulated myself with ten pages of protective caveats and useless digressions, let me get to my main point–

–Ahh shit, I’m out of time!

My question concerns the biophysical mechanics of sodomy–too much sodomy. Yes, heterosexual couples also engage in sodomy, but, as everyone knows, women only give it up maybe once a year on your birthday when they’re drunk enough to take Rex Harrison’s advice, but by that point you’re so turned on to be finally getting it that you swell up too big to complete the mission.

And so you go back to the standard heterosexual way of doing things–regular sex done doggie-style while pretending to yourself that it’s sodomy. And that’s as good as it gets. Just the way God intended it.

Now the argument is often made that some or most gay men don’t really engage in sodomy any more frequently than heterosexual couples. Here’s why I doubt that, in geometrical proof format:

1.  Men (and women, I suppose, but who the hell knows, really) desire the feeling of “intromission”–that is, the feeling of being inside another body.

2.  Men (and women, I suppose) not only desire intromission, but vigorous intromission, and, eventually, very vigorous intromission.

3.  For various bio-mechanical reasons (the gag reflex, teeth, braces, dental plates etc.) oral sex just doesn’t allow for the kind of vigorous intromission that regular sex provides. And, let’s face it (bad pun), even the high-quality manual supplementation given by oral sex artistes just isn’t the same as slam-bamming a pelvis.

4.  The so-called “Socratic method”–between the thighs, etc.–is only a simulacrum of real intromission. Sooner or later, people want the real thing, The Allegory of the Cave notwithstanding.

Ergo, sodomy–too much sodomy.

And so I conclude with the question that started this article–is there anything wrong with too much sodomy? And I’m not talking morally wrong, or spiritually wrong, or religiously wrong–fuck that shit (another unfortunate pun)–I’m talking about physically wrong.

Anyone with a good answer or refutation is encouraged to reply here because, as Harold Ramis or his co-writers put it in the movie Stripes:  “I’m willing to learn.”

But please, tell me, don’t show me.

Why Witchcraft Makes Sense

Posted on by
Reply

If a positive attitude is so damned beneficial, why shouldn’t a negative attitude be capable of harm?

It’s only fair.

Even if it’s foul.

Everyone wants the upside–that a good attitude brings about better performance results–but no one wants to acknowledge the equal and opposite corollary whereby a foul attitude should be able to bring about some shit.

Of course, positive attitude alone isn’t enough. Positive attitude is just a performance enhancer–there’s got to be effort or action to enhance.

The same should apply to negative attitudes, and so even the hocus-pocus of witchcraft makes sense in a general way–just having a foul attitude is not enough. Some kind of action must accompany the bad mindset.¹

But that is a digression–the main point is that the philosophical attitude of modern people towards the power of positive vs. negative thinking is more contradictory and thus more “illogical” than the nearly universal belief in witches and witchcraft among pre-modern peoples.

The pre-modern view–that there is power in both positive and negative thinking, positive and negative symbols–is much more consistent.

Another serious anthropological mystery solved in jest.²

JOKE NOTES:

1.  Society normally prohibits the kind of “action” or “effort” or “work” that the foul-minded want to undertake. So direct, logical action is precluded from the start by Society.

Therefore, indirect, illogical actions are the only choice–symbols and movements and utterances and thoughts–things that literally “don’t matter” but are often (figuratively) much more important than material things–these are the only sphere of action allowed by Society, or at least not easily controlled.

But for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction and this also applies to Society’s actions and normative pressures. Therefore Advanced Witchcraft takes advantage of the reactive force that inevitably results from the “positive actions” undertaken by Society. What Society taketh away–the option of direct physical harm–it must also give back even if in modified form.

In fact, truly advanced witchcraft makes use of the latest data and theory from sociology and anthropology and carefully integrates them into its hocus-pocus symbol systems with woopty-doo results.

I myself have witnessed talismans representing the unemployment rate used in conjunction with more traditional representations for casting curses upon intended victims. I saw a Tarot deck where the Devil had been replaced by Patriarchy, and the Tower was referred to as the World Capitalist System.

They say it improves the accuracy of their forecasts by 16% of a suggestive metaphor. That’s a two-thirds savings on your wasted money.

It can also bilk an extra big tip from an unsuspecting businessperson.

2.  Obviously there are other factors besides logical consistency that help explain the nearly universal belief in witchcraft among pre-modern peoples. A classic sociological explanation is that group cohesion is reinforced by having a flexible scapegoat system wherein anyone can be accused of engineering misfortune through witchcraft.