Damascene Moment on Abortion

… or how I finally got rid of more of the Japanesus Chrinotweed infesting by brain

First off, this is not a man pronouncing on abortion for the benefit of womankind. More the realisation of how deep spiritual dualism can bury itself into thought long after it’s been rejected.

Age 14, RE lesson from Father Cooper.

A woman with nine children goes to the doctor.

“Doctor!” she implores, “I’m pregnant again! Is there anything you can do?”
“An abortion do you mean?”
“I just have too many children! I can’t cope!”
“Why not kill one of your other children?” he suggests.
“Oh I couldn’t do that,” she cries, “that would be murder!”

As far as I remember that was the extent of the debate we had. Honestly, I didn’t have strong feelings about abortion then; it didn’t seem relevant.

FF to now…

I’m resigned and signed up to it being the woman’s choice. I think about the absurd interpretation of cause and effect. He wanted it with passion now she’s got the morality laser on her? The pontification of the millisecond before and after of that magic moment when the one lucky sperm buries into the egg and POW! IT IS LIFE!

And yet, I am bugged by life being precious so how can anyone end that potentiality. More accurately bugged by not having scalpel precision of when. Inception? Heartbeat? NN weeks? Up until the life is viable without mother’s aid?

But then I realise…

Oh for heaven’s sake I’m still associating mysticism with life. Scrap that. Piss off Jesus.

It’s so simple. The mother HAS that magical power. She has the wand, the ring, the womb. She is the Author – she has the Authority. Obviously her choice until it need not be. Obvious to women I guess.

Additionally, interesting that women have this magic power, priests don’t yet they jealously rob women of the right to exercise the power they have.



I lose my shit with a Christian

I can usually cope with proselytizers in low gear.

If they’re older and merely offering a leaflet, a simple “no thank-you” suffices. If they’re trying a little harder and look game I might engage in a debate. This has usually finished with the Christian saying I’m nuts and seeking easier prey or the old stand-by of “I’ll pray for you.”

But yesterday I said, “I used to be Christian but I’m atheist now thanks,” this one looked game.

“You go to the doctor?”


“You take their medicine?”


“So you believe in medicine?”

“No. I recognise evidence.”

That threw him a bit. He was obviously expecting me to express belief in medicine which he would leverage. So undeterred he repeated the same line which resulted in the same outcome.

“I will show you evidence,” he says. He’s going through his phone’s camera roll now to show me a picture of his leg ulcer, which he has since recovered from after praying to Jesus.

“Correlation is not causation!” but why am I angry now? I rationalize at the time I’m starting to make an argument he can’t comprehend or doesn’t want to. No doubt Jesus taking time out of his busy schedule of not coming back to Earth in order to heal his leg made him feel pretty good. I swear a lot and move on. But I want to pound his face out of existence. I visualize doing it.

Normally I am ashamed when I lose my rag but not this time. Later, I recognise that this all took place outside the hospital where I recently lost someone very close, while this simpleton was using his imaginary friend’s imaginary healing of his leg to manipulate me to be like him.

He thinks he is pious. He is simply selfish and self-absorbed.

I hope I don’t see him again.


Resurrection Ramble

A quickie with no Lego.

The evangelists are light on the detail of Jesus’ resurrection. Understandable, they weren’t there and are relying on word of mouth decades after. But that’s fine, we can examine this from first principles and see where we end up.

John 3:16

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life

Straight off, why have just the one offspring God? I suppose it makes Jesus the main event. Do we have a record of God saying he’s having just the one child? No? Just Jesus’ word then. Bit suss. Did God produce other kids at other times and spread them further afield from the Levant? Maybe… Ah who are we kidding? One shot one kill. Keep the message simple.

It’s a given crucifixion kills Jesus. He’s dead, bereft of life and off the twig. So who resurrects him? He can’t do it himself because he is dead. Dead people don’t get to go shopping, let alone bringing themselves back to life. So God did it – his dad.

Any parent who’s child has died would want to do the same. None have been able to but God uses his God powers to bring his son back from death. Three days he lasted, enduring the death of his child and he cracked. Seems like all powerful, all knowing Christian God was less able to go through that process than regular people.

And that act of weakness gave us salvation?

Or another tact – if the soul truly is immortal then death is trivial. How does God’s “son” going through that process and coming out the other side any more significant than any other death?

It all sounds like justification post event. When you have a God made flesh you need a pretty good tale to cover his dying like any other person.

For God so loved the world that he rescued his son from its dangers and did nothing for all those who died pointlessly

It’s only because I was skull-fed this nonsense as a kid I get motivated enough to type about it.