Install Theme

Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

It's Only the End if You Want it to Be

Posts tagged religion

Jun 29 '14

tonidorsay:

daniellecaliforniaa:

The primary teaching of every religion? Don’t be an asshole.

Starting with do not assume there are only 9 religions that comprise “every”

(Source: thecodeinecowboy)

Mar 27 '14
thegreycatsby:

nudiemuse:

sweetliest:

sarahisalright:

astaraelweeps:

parisianinsomnia:

astaraelweeps:

lesenfantsdabraham:

What’s the point of that post though ?
"Oh Jewish women, Muslim women and Christin women have to pray? Wow so sad.”

yes that is literally all we do
i do nothing but sternly stare into space and clutch my rosary
there is literally nothing else in my life

Only atheists can wear green.

religious women don’t go outside
the sun is fatal to us

atheists can fly

green is not a creationist color

Only atheist women can look up.

green is not a creationist color

As a Jewish woman, I can verify that we do, in fact, do nothing but stand in front of Shabbos candles 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Even though Shabbos only comes once a week and it only takes like a minute to light some candles. We still have to stand in front of them in that exact position, with our fingers pressed to our lips, because if we move, God will damn us to Hell forever. Even though we don’t believe in eternal damnation.
When the candles go out, we are allowed to re-light them, but after that we have to resume our positions and stay in place. We sleep standing up in front of candles. We have to be spoon-fed our meals standing in front of those candles. We don’t even have relationships with friends, or family, or romantic partners, because our entire life is those candles, clearly.

thegreycatsby:

nudiemuse:

sweetliest:

sarahisalright:

astaraelweeps:

parisianinsomnia:

astaraelweeps:

lesenfantsdabraham:

What’s the point of that post though ?

"Oh Jewish women, Muslim women and Christin women have to pray? Wow so sad.”

yes that is literally all we do

i do nothing but sternly stare into space and clutch my rosary

there is literally nothing else in my life

Only atheists can wear green.

religious women don’t go outside

the sun is fatal to us

atheists can fly

green is not a creationist color

Only atheist women can look up.

green is not a creationist color

As a Jewish woman, I can verify that we do, in fact, do nothing but stand in front of Shabbos candles 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Even though Shabbos only comes once a week and it only takes like a minute to light some candles. We still have to stand in front of them in that exact position, with our fingers pressed to our lips, because if we move, God will damn us to Hell forever. Even though we don’t believe in eternal damnation.

When the candles go out, we are allowed to re-light them, but after that we have to resume our positions and stay in place. We sleep standing up in front of candles. We have to be spoon-fed our meals standing in front of those candles. We don’t even have relationships with friends, or family, or romantic partners, because our entire life is those candles, clearly.

(Source: piatchbiatch)

Jan 23 '14

nearlyheadlessfinnick:

Favorite Movie Collection:  Quais de Seine from Paris, je t'aime [2006]

[x]

Sep 9 '13
yellowcape:

thoughtsaboutdickgrayson:

From The New Teen Titans #21 (July 1982)
Although Dick hasn’t thought much about religion, other people have thought about it for him. Here are some links if you are interested:
http://www.dixonverse.net/articles/christ.html
http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Nightwing.html
*Warning: the G-word does appear on this site, although it also uses Roma.

I’m usually tuned-in to religious notions in what I read, but I have never thought about Dick as practicing any religion. Nor do I remember the religious books/CDs or whatever else that are mentioned in the articles mentioned. The only Roma religious-like item I’ve seen is a rosary-ish item that Yoska gave him and that Dick picked up out of the rubble of his exploded building. I don’t know how much of an issue the religious practice of characters should be. Much of the western world is so culturally Christian, that we think that a lot of people who are from the west per definition practice christianity if they are religious. Personally I find it difficult to give such a important character as Dick a defined religious identity or practice. It has nothing to do with my own religious affliction, but rather the fact that he is a popular fictional character and his entire presence is supposed to be something everyone can relate to. Giving him an active religious life will restrict that. It isn’t a bad thing in itself that a character is actively religious - I’m personally pleased to see it when I do. We need those too,. Explicit religious activities will IMHO simply by its sheer presence make a character be less popular, no matter how nice it’d be for the believers of said religion that he or she was an active practitioner. I’d love to Nightwing to stay as popular as he is and be an active reliious practitioner, but commerce doesn’t work that way. Religion is very often synonymous with less popularity. I don’t know if the US is an exception to this, as the Bat-comics are very American.
Feel free to correct me or disagree! I just couldn’t let this pass without commenting. :)

I have to say, I completely disagree with the idea that giving a character a particular religion will make them only relatable to people of that religion. To me, that’s like saying that giving them a particular race makes them only relatable to people of that race. Or that giving them a defined cultural background will make them only relatable to people of that exact cultural background.
It’s all part of making a complete, fully-fleshed-out character, and you don’t need to be identical to that character to love them. I’m Jewish, and I love that Ben Grimm and Kitty Pryde are Jewish, but I also love that Nightcrawler and Helena Bertinelli are Catholics, and that Bilal Asselah and Sooraya Qadir are Sunni Muslims, and that Wonder Woman worships the Greek pantheon. I love that Sooraya wears a niqab, not because it has anything to do with me or my life, but because it’s part of her character and it makes her richer and more interesting - not to mention that it gives representation to a group that doesn’t tend to be represented all too positively. And we need that representation, especially of characters who aren’t the Christian-but-not-too-Christian norm. We need characters who are avowedly atheist, and agnostic, and Jewish and Buddhist and Muslim and Mormon and pagan. We need all of it.
And it’s just very limiting to me, to say that explicit religion needs to be kept away from characters because it risks making them less popular. Unless you’re planning to make characters who are just blank slates for the audience to project themselves onto, it’s impossible to create characters who won’t differ from some members of their audience in some way or another - religiously, politically, in personality type, in background. (Frankly, isn’t the fact that Dick was raised by a billionaire harder to relate to than any religious affiliation he could possibly be given?) That’s okay. People love good characters, not just characters who are exactly identical to them. Representation is exciting if you’re part of the group being represented, to be sure, but there’s no reason it needs to be alienating to people who aren’t members of that group.
Religion is a touchy subject, I get that, but I’m not saying these characters should go around giving long, preachy speeches about their religious beliefs here. I’m just saying that religion (or lack thereof) can and should be used to flesh out their character in a way which is organic and natural. To me, Helena would be a very different character were she not Catholic, just as Sooraya would be a very different character were she not Muslim. And I don’t think their characters would be the better for it. If people are offended by reading about religious practices that aren’t their own, then frankly that’s their problem. That’s no reason other religions shouldn’t get to be represented.
As to Dick, no, I’ve never seen him as particularly religious, despite what Dixon says. Personally, I think he believes in some kind of higher power/God, and probably in the afterlife/heaven as well, but I don’t think he’s particularly formal about it or identifies with any one religious sect. It would be interesting to have his religious beliefs somewhat informed by his Romani background, as from what I know of traditional Romani beliefs (admittedly, not much), there’s definitely a quasi-religious element there. (See more on this here.) But, again, I don’t think he’s particularly devout, and I don’t think Dick entirely embraces traditional Romani beliefs either religiously or culturally. I think he’s more complex than that, partly due to the complexity of his upbringing, partly just because of who he is as a person. Rather, I think his Romani roots, like the other aspects of his upbringing and background, partially inform him and his beliefs as an individual.

yellowcape:

thoughtsaboutdickgrayson:

From The New Teen Titans #21 (July 1982)

Although Dick hasn’t thought much about religion, other people have thought about it for him. Here are some links if you are interested:

http://www.dixonverse.net/articles/christ.html

http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Nightwing.html

*Warning: the G-word does appear on this site, although it also uses Roma.


I’m usually tuned-in to religious notions in what I read, but I have never thought about Dick as practicing any religion. Nor do I remember the religious books/CDs or whatever else that are mentioned in the articles mentioned. The only Roma religious-like item I’ve seen is a rosary-ish item that Yoska gave him and that Dick picked up out of the rubble of his exploded building. I don’t know how much of an issue the religious practice of characters should be. Much of the western world is so culturally Christian, that we think that a lot of people who are from the west per definition practice christianity if they are religious. Personally I find it difficult to give such a important character as Dick a defined religious identity or practice. It has nothing to do with my own religious affliction, but rather the fact that he is a popular fictional character and his entire presence is supposed to be something everyone can relate to. Giving him an active religious life will restrict that. It isn’t a bad thing in itself that a character is actively religious - I’m personally pleased to see it when I do. We need those too,. Explicit religious activities will IMHO simply by its sheer presence make a character be less popular, no matter how nice it’d be for the believers of said religion that he or she was an active practitioner. I’d love to Nightwing to stay as popular as he is and be an active reliious practitioner, but commerce doesn’t work that way. Religion is very often synonymous with less popularity. I don’t know if the US is an exception to this, as the Bat-comics are very American.

Feel free to correct me or disagree! I just couldn’t let this pass without commenting. :)

I have to say, I completely disagree with the idea that giving a character a particular religion will make them only relatable to people of that religion. To me, that’s like saying that giving them a particular race makes them only relatable to people of that race. Or that giving them a defined cultural background will make them only relatable to people of that exact cultural background.

It’s all part of making a complete, fully-fleshed-out character, and you don’t need to be identical to that character to love them. I’m Jewish, and I love that Ben Grimm and Kitty Pryde are Jewish, but I also love that Nightcrawler and Helena Bertinelli are Catholics, and that Bilal Asselah and Sooraya Qadir are Sunni Muslims, and that Wonder Woman worships the Greek pantheon. I love that Sooraya wears a niqab, not because it has anything to do with me or my life, but because it’s part of her character and it makes her richer and more interesting - not to mention that it gives representation to a group that doesn’t tend to be represented all too positively. And we need that representation, especially of characters who aren’t the Christian-but-not-too-Christian norm. We need characters who are avowedly atheist, and agnostic, and Jewish and Buddhist and Muslim and Mormon and pagan. We need all of it.

And it’s just very limiting to me, to say that explicit religion needs to be kept away from characters because it risks making them less popular. Unless you’re planning to make characters who are just blank slates for the audience to project themselves onto, it’s impossible to create characters who won’t differ from some members of their audience in some way or another - religiously, politically, in personality type, in background. (Frankly, isn’t the fact that Dick was raised by a billionaire harder to relate to than any religious affiliation he could possibly be given?) That’s okay. People love good characters, not just characters who are exactly identical to them. Representation is exciting if you’re part of the group being represented, to be sure, but there’s no reason it needs to be alienating to people who aren’t members of that group.

Religion is a touchy subject, I get that, but I’m not saying these characters should go around giving long, preachy speeches about their religious beliefs here. I’m just saying that religion (or lack thereof) can and should be used to flesh out their character in a way which is organic and natural. To me, Helena would be a very different character were she not Catholic, just as Sooraya would be a very different character were she not Muslim. And I don’t think their characters would be the better for it. If people are offended by reading about religious practices that aren’t their own, then frankly that’s their problem. That’s no reason other religions shouldn’t get to be represented.

As to Dick, no, I’ve never seen him as particularly religious, despite what Dixon says. Personally, I think he believes in some kind of higher power/God, and probably in the afterlife/heaven as well, but I don’t think he’s particularly formal about it or identifies with any one religious sect. It would be interesting to have his religious beliefs somewhat informed by his Romani background, as from what I know of traditional Romani beliefs (admittedly, not much), there’s definitely a quasi-religious element there. (See more on this here.) But, again, I don’t think he’s particularly devout, and I don’t think Dick entirely embraces traditional Romani beliefs either religiously or culturally. I think he’s more complex than that, partly due to the complexity of his upbringing, partly just because of who he is as a person. Rather, I think his Romani roots, like the other aspects of his upbringing and background, partially inform him and his beliefs as an individual.

May 6 '13

hackingangel asked:

I have a question for you about religion. I, unfortunately, don't know much about the Jewish religion, but as I understand it, Jews do acknowledge the Hebrew Scriptures. Am I right or do I have no idea what I'm talking about?

By the ‘Hebrew Scriptures’, I’m assuming you mean the Five Books of Moses?

If so, the answer is yes: The Jewish Bible is comprised of the Five Books of Moses (aka the Torah), as well as the books of the Prophets (Nevi’im - this includes the books of Joshua, Samuel, Kings, Ezekiel, etc.) and Writings (Ketuvim - this includes the books of Esther, Daniel, Psalms, etc.)

Together, the whole thing is referred to as the “Tanakh” (Torah + Nevi’m + Ketuvim) or the Torah (this is less accurate, as technically ‘Torah’ only applies to the Books of Moses, but the term is often used to apply to the whole thing).

The Torah, or Books of Moses (which is, I believe, the basis of what Christians refer to as the Old Testament) covers the time period from the beginning of the world up until the death of Moses and the preparation of the Jews to enter Israel after the Exodus. These books are the only ones believed to literally be the Word of God, written by Moses (with the exception of the short section dealing with the aftermath of his death, which is believed to have been written by Joshua) through a unique level of prophecy.

The books of the Prophets, or Nevi’im, cover the time period from when Moses’ disciple Joshua took over as leader to lead the Jews into Israel, up until the beginnings of the Babylonian Exile. These books are believed to have been written by various of the prophets, but on a lesser level of prophecy than Moses’, making these books less directly the word of God. They are therefore considered slightly less holy, though obviously still taken very seriously.

The Writings/Ketuvim don’t really cover a chronological period in a comparable way, but rather are exactly what they sound like - a collection of holy writings (though there are deeper themes that tie them together). These books are attributed to various authors, including King David (Psalms), King Solomon (Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes) and the prophet Jeremiah (Lamentations). While these books are believed to have been written with divine inspiration, they are not on the level of prophecy, and are thus one level lower than the Nevi’im.

Together, these comprise the Jewish Bible.

I know for sure that Christians still accept the Torah/Books of Moses as true, and consider them your Old Testament. I’m not sure about the books of Prophets/Nevi’im and Writings/Ketuvim, but I’ve heard Christian preachers mention them from time to time so I’m pretty sure you guys do accept those as true as well, even if they’re not officially part of your Bible. You would probably know about this better than I would.

To my understanding, where the two religions break off is when it comes to what you call the New Testament, the books dealing with Jesus and his disciples. Unlike Christianity, Judaism rejects the divinity of Christ and does not consider him to have been the Son of God, thus the New Testament is not part of our Bible. This obviously also has much broader implications on the religions as a whole, since belief in Jesus supersedes many of the Old Testament commandments which Christians believe no longer need to be observed.

I believe that Christianity also rejects the Jewish Oral Torah, or Talmud (the Mishnah and the Gemara) and other later Jewish holy writings. But again, I’m sure you’d know that better than I would.

May 6 '13
Apr 11 '13

writeroffates:

luanna255:

kripke-is-my-king:

naturalmomma:

j-moriarty:

llane:

Nowhere in the 10 commandments does it say “Do Not Rape” yet the 5th Satanic Rule Of The Earth is “Do not make sexual advances unless given the mating signal.” Go ahead and just let that sink in.

satan: 1 god: 0

Just gonna reblog this again because I can.

Yes, because the Ten Commandments are the only religious rules that people following the Abrahamic religions abide by, clearly. (It amazes me sometimes that outsiders seem to not understand that the Ten Commandments, while important, are just one small section of the Bible. Orthodox Judaism has 613 commandments that adherents are expected to comply with, and various sub-categories of those 613, although obviously all of those will not be relevant to one person. Yet somehow people seem to think that our religious doctrine begins and ends with the Ten Commandments.)

In fact, not only does Judaism prohibit rape, the Talmudic sages were light-years ahead of their time in recognizing that rape can occur within a marriage (or any relationship), and that the stereotypical “hold her down and force her” scenario is not the only form of rape. In an Orthodox marriage, it is forbidden for either partner to use sex as a form of manipulation, to have sex when they are angry at each other, or when one of the spouses is drunk. A husband is forbidden to force his wife into any sex act she doesn’t want to participate in, and he is forbidden to get her drunk or otherwise try to coerce her into it.

There are people today who would still deny that these situations are rape, and yet the Talmudic Sages were aware of it and made sure to stringently guard against it going as far back as the time of Ancient Rome.

Your move, Satanism.

Seriously people, follow what religious beliefs you want, but don’t validate your choice by putting another persons beliefs down. 

^THIS. And it’s especially frustrating to me when these people are clearly so darn ignorant about the religions that they’re sneering at.

To be sure, I don’t doubt that this post was intended as a dig at Christianity, tumblr’s favorite Acceptable Target, and not Judaism or Islam. But forgetting that the Bible was ours long before Christianity came along is erasure in and of itself.

People seem to love the idea that the Abrahamic religions are uniquely oppressive and it is clearly much “cooler” to be against them, but what this ignores is that in fact Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were all incredibly progressive for the respective eras when they were founded. And are still a whole darn lot more progressive than many people seem to think.

I’m not saying there aren’t legitimate criticisms of any religion, because there surely are, but please, educate yourself before you open your mouth to try to use a religion that is thousands of years old as a punchline. I know it may be hard for you to imagine, but there might just be something you don’t know, here.

Feb 5 '13

toalwaysbeme asked:

Likewise, I am on tumblr more than email. And one does not have to know you so well to come to the conclusion that AD would be the first to know anything about you. It is literally written all over your blog. I will pass on the message to my bird-brain. Random question sans context: do you have thoughts about what was the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden?

(Haha, I would publish this message even if I didn’t have anything to say about your next question just so AD could see that. xD)

As the the forbidden fruit… well, this is where my long years of Jewish schooling come in. I could cite you numerous, contradicting opinions from Biblical scholars over the years (pomegranate, fig, grapes, apple, and even wheat among them). However, my opinion is simply that we don’t know what it was, and that what the actual fruit looked like (if it even looked like any fruit we can imagine) isn’t really the most important thing, anyway.

However, when it comes to “what it was” in a deeper sense, I do have some thoughts (which are not originally mine, of course). I definitely do NOT believe that the fruit conferred “knowledge” in the sense that God would have preferred for us to be stupid or ignorant. Likewise, I do not believe that the fruit conferred “knowledge of good and evil” in the sense that God would have preferred for us to be sociopaths. Clearly, these explanations are ridiculous and simplistic, and have been used for centuries to justify telling people that seeking knowledge and forming their own opinions is wrong (a position that I strongly disagree with).

The explanation that makes the most sense to me is one given by Moses Maimonides (quoted here and here, among other places), which is, simply, this: the fruit did not give us knowledge of morality where there was none before. Rather, it changed our knowledge of morality, to the way we view “good” and “evil” today. Specifically, the fruit changed our knowledge of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ from an objective understanding to the more subjective terms we see them as now. Nowadays, the way we perceive “good” and “evil” is influenced by our own desires and our cultural norms, etc. whereas before Adam and Eve ate from the tree, this would not have been so. There was a simpler, purer understanding of morality, which was lost when Adam and Eve ate the fruit.

It’s a very complicated issue to understand, obviously, but I hope that helps. For that matter, I am not sure interpreting the fruit as a literal “fruit” like an apple or an orange that you could buy at the grocery store is the right approach, either. The Garden of Eden, whatever exactly it was, was a very mysterious place, and very different from the world we know today. It stands to reason that the “fruit” there would very likely not have been like fruit as we know it. At the very least, everything there was imbued with a very deep ideological significance beyond the superficial physicality. In other words, a “fruit” was not simply a “fruit”, but a manifestation of something much deeper and more important.

Whether you are religious or not, you do Biblical stories a disservice if you interpret them with childish simplicity. If something doesn’t seem to make sense, quite likely there is a reason for it and it will become clearer if you look at the story on a deeper level. I believe it’s a huge mistake when religious authorities tell people that having faith means not asking too many questions, because on the contrary, I think (and this has always been the Jewish approach) that the Bible was written specifically to MAKE you ask questions. And if you see something that seems strange or illogical, it is probably a sign that you SHOULD be asking questions, and quite likely these questions have been asked already long before you came along, and if you look at the answers of Biblical scholars who came before you, there is a deeper understanding to be gained.

That’s a very long answer, and I’m sorry for rambling a bit there, but basically: telling people not to use their brains is never a good idea. That’s the theme here, folks.

Nov 26 '12
Aug 19 '12
actualdickgrayson:

dysenterygay:

withoutmypants:

sophsoph14:

disregardwomen:

cadaverous-porcelain:

killthebloodyredprinceofdeath:

twistedfuckk:

we ran out of plates

this can possibly be the greatest photo on tumblr.

This can possibly be the most disrespectful photo on Tumblr. I am not saying that you have to agree with what the bible says, but to utilize that book ‘as a plate’ knowing what it means to people, is just plain disrespectful. 
It’s sad that people are so full of anger when it comes to religion, that they would rather post photos like this than deal with their hostilities in a more appropriate way.

i’m sorry, i cant hear you over the sound of nOT BEING ABLE TO GET MARRIED BECAUSE OF THAT BOOK.

^ that comment

HOW CAN YOU BE DISRESPECTFUL TO SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T EXIST?

SHUT UP AND FUCKOG ENJOY THEFACT THERES PIZZA ON A BIBLE

According to the bible the appropriate way to handle the problems we have with religion would be wars and murders.
I think putting pizza on the bible is the least offensive thing…

Nikki, please don’t get angry at me for saying this, but if you honestly think that, I question if you’ve ever studied the Bible with a competent teacher. I assure you, the Bible is not encouraging us to solve our problems with wars and murders. Anyone who thinks so (and I’m not denying that they unfortunately exist), is guilty of serious misinterpretation.
And excuse me for asking this, but what exactly is good about this image? Is there something clever or funny that I’m not understanding? Some sort of punchline? It’s pizza, on a Bible, in a microwave. It’s not the most heinously offensive thing I’ve ever seen, but there doesn’t seem to be any purpose other than communicating that the person in question doesn’t like the Bible. Look, you don’t have to believe in it. I’m not here to push my beliefs on anyone. But yeah, you could at least be respectful of other people’s beliefs.
There is no excuse for people who use religion as an excuse to persecute others. But people have also been persecuted for being religious. And still are. My paternal grandparents lost almost every single member of their families in the Holocaust because they were Jewish. And maybe you don’t know this, but burning and degrading the Torah and other Jewish holy books? Has been a feature of anti-Semitic campaigns for over a thousand years. So, excuse me, yes, seeing this image bothers me. But you know what? I wouldn’t feel the need to comment if you didn’t feel the need to imply that I am somehow wrong for being bothered by this. That I’m being humorless and there is no valid reason not to “enjoy” this image (what exactly is so enjoyable, anyway? I feel like I’m still missing the fun part).
You know, I’m not particularly uptight when it comes to mocking religion. I can let some things slide in the name of a good joke. But this, frankly, isn’t even funny, and telling me that I should find it funny because the thing that’s really wrong here is the Bible itself is just completely dismissive and presumptuous.

actualdickgrayson:

dysenterygay:

withoutmypants:

sophsoph14:

disregardwomen:

cadaverous-porcelain:

killthebloodyredprinceofdeath:

twistedfuckk:

we ran out of plates

this can possibly be the greatest photo on tumblr.

This can possibly be the most disrespectful photo on Tumblr. I am not saying that you have to agree with what the bible says, but to utilize that book ‘as a plate’ knowing what it means to people, is just plain disrespectful. 

It’s sad that people are so full of anger when it comes to religion, that they would rather post photos like this than deal with their hostilities in a more appropriate way.

i’m sorry, i cant hear you over the sound of nOT BEING ABLE TO GET MARRIED BECAUSE OF THAT BOOK.

^ that comment

HOW CAN YOU BE DISRESPECTFUL TO SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T EXIST?

SHUT UP AND FUCKOG ENJOY THEFACT THERES PIZZA ON A BIBLE

According to the bible the appropriate way to handle the problems we have with religion would be wars and murders.

I think putting pizza on the bible is the least offensive thing…

Nikki, please don’t get angry at me for saying this, but if you honestly think that, I question if you’ve ever studied the Bible with a competent teacher. I assure you, the Bible is not encouraging us to solve our problems with wars and murders. Anyone who thinks so (and I’m not denying that they unfortunately exist), is guilty of serious misinterpretation.

And excuse me for asking this, but what exactly is good about this image? Is there something clever or funny that I’m not understanding? Some sort of punchline? It’s pizza, on a Bible, in a microwave. It’s not the most heinously offensive thing I’ve ever seen, but there doesn’t seem to be any purpose other than communicating that the person in question doesn’t like the Bible. Look, you don’t have to believe in it. I’m not here to push my beliefs on anyone. But yeah, you could at least be respectful of other people’s beliefs.

There is no excuse for people who use religion as an excuse to persecute others. But people have also been persecuted for being religious. And still are. My paternal grandparents lost almost every single member of their families in the Holocaust because they were Jewish. And maybe you don’t know this, but burning and degrading the Torah and other Jewish holy books? Has been a feature of anti-Semitic campaigns for over a thousand years. So, excuse me, yes, seeing this image bothers me. But you know what? I wouldn’t feel the need to comment if you didn’t feel the need to imply that I am somehow wrong for being bothered by this. That I’m being humorless and there is no valid reason not to “enjoy” this image (what exactly is so enjoyable, anyway? I feel like I’m still missing the fun part).

You know, I’m not particularly uptight when it comes to mocking religion. I can let some things slide in the name of a good joke. But this, frankly, isn’t even funny, and telling me that I should find it funny because the thing that’s really wrong here is the Bible itself is just completely dismissive and presumptuous.

Aug 5 '12
Oh, atheists, you are so cute.
Don’t you just hate those obnoxious, narrow-minded religious people? Always bashing other people’s beliefs and refusing to respect any viewpoint that isn’t their own…
… Oh, wait.

Oh, atheists, you are so cute.

Don’t you just hate those obnoxious, narrow-minded religious people? Always bashing other people’s beliefs and refusing to respect any viewpoint that isn’t their own…

… Oh, wait.

Jul 30 '12

A lovely and rare moment from BoP #6

x-beni-o2-x:

dcwomenkickingass:

In last week’s Birds of Prey there was a moment we don’t see very much in DC Comics outside of Wonder Woman. As Helena Bertinelli prepared herself for batttle, the writer Gail Simone, had her take a moment to pray.

Helena is Catholic so it makes sense for her to pray. But I was still surprised by the moment.  I’m used to Wonder Woman calling up on her Gods, but I can’t recall off-hand another character within DC stopping to pray.

Religion is such a personal and provocative topic. I imagine for most creators its easier to not to broach it and just leave it alone when writing characters. But when a character, like Helena, is about to risk severe injury and/or death it’s natural to want to steel oneself. Some will simply meditate. Some will strategize. And some will ask for help from their God.

I’m not sure I want to see people praying regularly in comics. I think it’s because such moments are so rare, it’s why the panels were so affecting. Or it could be simply my religious upbringing kicking in. But I liked it. It fit. It brought a new dimension to the character and to the fight.

What do you think?

I think it’s a mix of the rareness of visual praying within comics and the latent religious identification that many Western readers have with regards to the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam). As a Huntress fan and Catholic, I found the scene quite lovely, with a soft but enduring message. Characters like Helena whose background have firm ties with religion makes scenes like this not seem heavy-fisted or forced. It’s not something that would be necessary for every issue that Helena appears in, but wonderful to see when the situation calls for her to pray.

^ I agree with this analysis. I think the important thing is that characterization always needs to come first. For a character like Helena, whose struggles with religion have always been a prominent aspect of her character, this scene feels natural and, more than that, extremely meaningful and powerful. However, if a similar scene were done with a character who has never been shown to have significant religious belief, I think it would come across as forced and preachy.

I was actually talking to my mother about this very scene yesterday, as an example of what I consider to be religion in comics done right. This scene is simple, character-driven, and, to me at least, incredibly powerful in the context of the storyline. Helena is heading off to a fight that, as far as she knows, will bring her death. She’s doing it out of her love and loyalty to Dinah. And her reaction, in what she thinks will be her last moments, is not to complain or get angry at the unfairness of her situation (which would be a completely understandable reaction), but to thank God for bringing meaning into her life. Whether you yourself are religious or not, I think that kind of grace and dignity in the face of death is just inspiring, period. This moment still gets me choked up, every time I read it.

I especially give credit to Gail Simone for how she writes religion in this scene and other places considering that she herself is an atheist. I have so much respect for her as a writer in that she can write characters of all different belief systems and cultures with such consideration, regardless of her own beliefs.

May 20 '12

maggieeo asked:

31, 35, 48, 61, 80

31) Believe in God/Belong to a religion of your own free will?

Yes, I do. It’s not something I discuss on tumblr much, but I am actually extremely religious and it’s something I believe in deeply.

35) Agree with ‘An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’? (ignoring the religious relation to that saying)

No. First of all, even within the Biblical context, the passage in question is generally interpreted to mean that someone who inflicts that kind of harm has to pay the MONEY that is equivalent to the damage that they’ve done, not that the victim can literally go around knocking people’s eyes and teeth out. The Sages teach that this is because if the verse were interpreted literally, it would put the world into chaos, a philosophy I very much agree with.

In general, I think revenge is a very problematic concept and should be treated with extreme caution. I can’t come right out and say that I NEVER think it is justified to take revenge, but I think in general the correct thing to do is to focus on doing good and protecting the innocent, not on punishing those who you decide are “bad”. What gives you the authority to decide that?

48) Tattoos OR no tattoos?

No tattoos. I think many people tend to regret them after they get them, in any case. A temporary tattoo I would consider.

80) Reading OR Listening to music?

READING. No contest. I LIKE listening to music, but books are like oxygen to me.

Mar 22 '12
"Americans"? Don’t you mean Christians? Not all Americans are Christian. Like, not even close. Over one-third of the population is not. Making that kind of generalization just just idiotic.
Also, not all Americans (or Christians) discriminate against Middle-Easterners, but yeah, the point being made here is still valid. It’s just kind of stupid to refer to “Americans worshipping” something, as if America were a theocracy with a uniform set of religious beliefs.

"Americans"? Don’t you mean Christians? Not all Americans are Christian. Like, not even close. Over one-third of the population is not. Making that kind of generalization just just idiotic.

Also, not all Americans (or Christians) discriminate against Middle-Easterners, but yeah, the point being made here is still valid. It’s just kind of stupid to refer to “Americans worshipping” something, as if America were a theocracy with a uniform set of religious beliefs.

(Source: christiantheatheist)

Feb 28 '12

mon-rah:

berndor:

sandandglass:

Am I the only one who finds it weird that he says “public square” instead of “public sphere”? 

public square and public sphere are two entirely different things but okay.

point is, santorum only finds more and more ways to confirm that he’s an idiot.

I give up on the country

I try to keep politics off my blog, but sweet fancy Moses, Rick Santorum. Freedom of religion = religion is bad in what universe? The idea is that people of all religious beliefs and denominations should be able to live according to their own moral codes. Not that there should be no religion at all.

And what is up with him deciding that the separation of church and state means that religious people can’t have a voice in politics. I… I don’t think you understand what “separation of church and state” means, sir. Of course religious people can and should take part in politics. Who is saying otherwise? The point is that religious politicians need to understand that in this country, the law exists to protect the rights of citizens, not to enforce the rules of any one religious doctrine. It’s kinda right there in the First Amendment. As long as they understand that, people of faith certainly have a lot to contribute to the political world, and no one is stopping them from doing that.