"Who would give a law to lovers? Love is unto itself a higher law."The Consolation of Philosophy (524)
by Boethius, Christian philosopher
The following video is the heart and subject of this article and if you choose not to watch it, all of the following text you read here will not be terribly meaningful to you. Be warned because the video will disgust you; and depending on what you are disgusted by precisely, I shall know what sort of human being you are,
"As Africans, we want to ask Barack Obama to explain to us: is this what he wants
to bring to Africa as a human right to EAT DA POO POO OF OUAH CHILDREN!?" LOL.
It's okay to laugh. I laughed my shit out the first time I saw it.
The excitable firebrand talking in the video calls himself Pastor "Dr" Martin Ssempa, which I must stress is not a medical doctor. I feel the need to do so because this foul breed of alleged Christians love to use their stupid, worthless biblical doctorates to lend themselves an air of legitimacy and authority. He is an odious, odious little man who is at the forefront of the anti-homosexual detractivism in Uganda, a country quite infamous for its harsh criminalisation of same-sex relationships. I'm talking of up to 14 years of imprisonment here; a crazy long time to be put away. The atmosphere of civil and human rights on the African continent is a suffocating breathe - this is a place where despicable Christian and Muslim men would inflict "corrective rape" on lesbians in attempts to cure them of their homosexuality. You might remember the chilling murder of Eudy Simelane who was gang-raped and brutally beaten before being stabbed 25 times in her face, chest and legs two years ago; all for being a lesbian and an equal rights campaigner.
She's certainly cured of homosexuality now alright.
In March last year, a trio of widely discredited American evangelical Christian kooks landed on Ugandan soil and preached to thousands of Ugandans about the "hidden and dark [gay] agenda", and that "the gay movement is an evil institution" which aims "to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity." And the three rabble-rousing gits made these fantastic claims without having a single shred of evidence to back them up, of course.
Their misleading, hateful and bigoted talks - in which one guy even asserted that homosexuality is akin to child molestation and bestiality - led directly to the genesis of the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill in April 2009 which will introduce the DEATH PENALTY to homosexuals arrested by the state. Allow me to reiterate: they are ready to FUCKING MURDER people for being what they are, for committing a victimless crime and for falling in love with someone who just happens to be a member of their own gender. I ask, at which point in time did unusual pairings become more deplorable than taking another person's life?
This is the brand of Christianity that Martin Ssempa engenders. He is one of the bill's staunchest advocates. By his own admission, he also enjoys "researching" scat porn in his leisure time. I have this creepy feeling that the "gay" porn he showed to his audience (and also thrust into the bishop's face, haha) in the video above actually came from his own private collection.
The pastor doth protest too much, methinks.
He's wearing that intense expression on his face because he is POO POO'ing in some other bloke's mouth.
What more, he's a liar. Surprise, surprise!
The practices of FEESTING, ANAL LEACKING and EATING DA POO POO are NOT exclusively homosexual behaviour; I've personally seen anilingus and vaginal fisting in heterosexual porn. Neither are these acts as commonly practiced between homosexual couples as Martin Ssempa wants you and his brain-dead flock of sheeples to believe. Scatophilia and coprophagy in particular, are particularly rare paraphilias in themselves and a 1999 Finnish study published in the Journal of Sex Research found no statistically significant difference between homosexual (17%) and heterosexual (18%) sadomasochist males when it comes to dabbling in the brown arts.
So yeah, it's scientifically documented that straight dudes also EAT DA POO POO ALL OBAH DA PLASE.
Quickly, someone must inform Martin Ssempa about this so he can help draft a legislation against heterosexuals too - and kill the fuck out of everyone.
And so what if two consenting adults of the same sex make love or eat each others poop? They are not hurting anyone, aren't they? Also, I think you must really, really love someone to be willing to eat that person's poop (girls, faster go ask your boyfriends if they love you enough to eat your poop). Still, in my capacity as a medical student, I feel that it is my duty to inform everyone that chowing down on another person's shit, whether you are straight or gay, is generally considered to be a Bad Idea.
As a message to my Christian friends and readers: pastors, preachers and priests often tell filthy lies to further their agendas of discrimination and intolerance, so I urge caution when listening to the messages they try to pass on to you. I have personally seen it in action. Right now, Martin Ssempa is spreading falsehoods with the authority of God behind him and sanctioning murder in Jesus' name in Uganda. What are all you enlightened, loving, moderate Christians going to do about it?
Nothing, I bet.
Now, to end this post on a lighter note, watch this Auto-Tune remix of the above video. This is why I love, love, love the internet,
"Like ice-cream! Like ice-cream!" So freaking... catchy! Must... dance!
Read also: Why We Should Accept Gay People, an older post of mine which defended homosexuality.
He who pooh-poohs religious nuts,
k0k s3n w4i
27 comments:
i like the bishop's reaction to the video xD
haha... Love the remix version. true, it's so catchy.. haha.
Anyway, on your topic. I would say, I am absolutely against taking another's life. No matter for whatever reasons. So, if the pastor is literally encouraging his people to kill another for being in love. I would say, he is seriously demented.
However, I do not support gays, lesbians etc. Yes, I know it's their nature, they can't help it, but still, I believe that we are what we THINK we are. It is all in the mind. - Even so, I do not judge a person through their sexual orientation, as long as they don't create trouble for me, I will always stay civil/friends with them.
cheerios~
yeap i saw the Uganda bill and was shocked to the core. christian missionaries doing their good work again? equivalent to other missionaries in places like papau new guinea decrying the languages of the indigenous place as satanic and proceeding to systematically wipe out the precious heritage of the natives.
this pastor, who in gesticulating wildly, playing up emotions, scaring people into thinking that homosexuality is a grievous sin (when biologists note how it is naturally occurring in the animal kingdom), is uncannily similar to Hitler. Hitler, when egging him his soldiers (predominantly Catholic army), also wielded such oratory skills to much success, or harm, depending on how one sees this.
good job on putting into words what i felt compelled, but weary, to rebuke.
I don't get why humans do this. Do we really have the authority to judge others?
And then there's the killing and whatnot, didn't the Bible state ever so clearly "Thou shalt not kill" and yet, they're killing other people for their differences.
It's so terrible that so many humans are so ignorant and stupid. I'm surprised humans are considered intelligent creatures. But God knows, we still have a long way to go.
Phoebs: thanks for ignoring the majority of my post -.-
nana: "However, I do not support gays, lesbians etc. Yes, I know it's their nature, they can't help it, but still, I believe that we are what we THINK we are. It is all in the mind"
then i posit this question to you: are you heterosexual because you think you are? when you fall in love with a man, is it because you think it's appropriate or right for you to fall in love with a man? love is an emotion - a strong, primal, intrusive and consuming urge to be with and to care for someone. the rational, reasoning mind is nowhere to be seen in the picture (you know what i mean if you've ever been in love). "it's all in the mind" is a scientifically accurate statement, yes, but remember; human feelings like anger, jealousy, happiness, despair and loneliness are all in the mind. your faith in your religion and your love for god are also all in your mind. we are all creatures of our minds, our hearts and our passions, nana. if you understand what i'm saying, you'll understand why i will always, always support the right for homosexuals to love and to be together with one another.
jansen ko: more people should check out joan roughgarden's evolution's rainbow - especially those that decry homosexuality as unnatural. while the prevalence of homosexuality is hard to account for, because complete homosexuals do not produce offsprings, they remain ubiquitous in the animal kingdom. this suggest some sort of social imperative which retains homosexual traits in animals (including the human animal). preying on the insecurities and fears of people have always been the modus operandi of the religious - they prey on their fear of death, fear of damnation and in the case of martin ssempa, he preyed on the ugandan's fear of gays recruiting their children and destroying the traditional heterosexual family unit - which, i don't need to tell you, is bollocks. thanks for your two cents :)
Jake Lo: christians need to take their noses out of leviticus, 1 corinthians and other homophobic bible books and focus on say, matthew 7:12 ("do not judge, or you too will be judged. for in the same way you judge others, you will be judged and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you") or proverbs 21:2 ("all a man's ways seem right to him, but the lord weighs the heart") - if christians really want to be fair and just, and do right by humanity, they can easily justify it biblically. but most prefer to justify the condemnation of people who mean them no harm.
whaat.. it was the funniest part =.= *rocks out to geboren um zu leben* actually if my children want to eat poo poo its entirely up to them T^T
I know where you're coming from and I do agree. Everything we do, we believe, we felt came from our mind. I understand what you are saying and so, I do not treat homosexuals any differently than I do others. Some of my good friends are homosexuals as well.
I do not support their orientation, but I won't judge their decision. I believe, their life is their own to live.
Although I do not accept homosexuality, I also know that feelings are something we have no or very little control of. And so, even if I cannot accept it, I respect it.
That is the only extent I could go. I would've given them my opinion if they asked, but I won't force them to accept it. We are humans, creatures with flaws after all. My thoughts are just what a feeble mind of mine could come out with, it won't be always right, and it won't be always wrong.
Phoebs: my kids can eat da poo poo too so long as they don't expect me to kiss them.
nana: "I do not treat homosexuals any differently than I do others."
this gladdens me. so are you saying that if a bill come through in malaysia decriminalising homosexuality, finally allowing them to marry and enjoy all the rights straight couples enjoy in marriages and civil unions - you'd stand behind it?
Individually, and personally no. I probably won't be one of those people who will be in the 'anti-homosexual' or, 'say no to homosexual bill' or something, but I still won't like it. and thus, I won't be among those who would support it either,
nana: so, you do treat homosexuals differently after all? i mean, you're okay with your heterosexual friends marrying and enjoying the rights afforded to them by their union by the state - but you won't let your homosexual friends have the same? i guess you don't really mean that nice little thing you said after all: about treating people the same, no matter their sexual orientation. so, let me get this straight; you are saying that they don't deserve the same rights as heterosexuals because of who and what they are, things they cannot change about themselves? life is just chock-full of these hard questions, isn't it? :)
haha.. when you put it like that, I guess, I don't... For me, I treat them just the same. I mean, I'd be friends with them, talk with them, play and eat with them, work with them, and joke with them. I'll try not to judge them, and respect our difference.
Yet, homosexuality is a sin. In my religion that is drilled within me, it is. and I believe in that. If you are talking about any other sin, I would've said the same. I will not support the sin. Not killing, not drugs, not abortion, and so, not homosexuality as well.
Do you see what I mean I by not treating them differently? to me what is wrong, is wrong. Even if you say you can't help it. The psycho people who finds enjoyment in killing, they can't help it, but still we see it as wrong. The addicts, they really can't help it, and yet we still see it's wrong. all this behavior, as well as homosexuality is considered as deviant and so, I treat it as equally.
I can't help to dislike homosexuality. but that doesn't mean I dislike the person who is homosexual. I live by the rule "Hate the action but not the actor"
and try to live by it as much as I can everyday.
yeah, I agree, life is chock-full of these hard questions. Whether you agree or disagree, you'd have to learn to respect what others think.
nana: the actions of psycho killers produces victims. paedophiles produces victims. junkies, when they indulge in petty crimes to pay for their habits, also victimises others (besides, junkies aren't born that way, so your analogy is inappropriate).
but homosexuality hurts no one. it is victimless, unless when they are themselves victimised by straight people.
your arguments, i fear, would not hold up to close scrutiny.
Now to deal with the pricklier question of sin - i know anti-homosexuality is an islamic tenet but should homosexuals follow muslim laws when they aren't muslims? while islam is the state religion, our constitution is a secular one. if you do not make laws against non-muslim chinese and indian practices of eating pork or having sex outside of wedlock - why this exception for non-muslim homosexuals?
i reject all three abrahamic religions because i feel (and this is just my opinion) that they aren't as perfect as everyone keep claiming them to be - how can all of them be perfect, inerrant and beautiful at the same time when they contradict one another? and i cannot accept the intolerance and discrimination these religions preach. my conscience won't allow me. the black people were discriminated in the west and were enslaved for centuries because of the biblical curse of ham, if you want an example.
i know the sorrows, the hardships, the pains which comes with being homosexual, of hating yourself for being strange and different. i know because i know them, and i know that most of them want to do is to love freely, to marry, to have that basic right that all of us heterosexual people have long taken for granted.
you see, when i say i do not treat any one differently for who they are, i mean it with all my heart. the real hard question here is: how many people can think outside of the religion they were accidentally born in, outside the religion which was "drilled" into them as you've said, and be brave enough to do the right thing by his or her fellow human being?
of course, this discussion can serve no further purpose. i know you cannot, dare not question your religion. thanks for playing :)
I guess, I could not answer you on that. I am inadequate to give my opinion on the context of religion, since I am not equip with enough knowledge.
But, I do know why I would prefer homosexuality not to be shown publicly and accepted publicly. You said so yourself, homosexuality is something that a person acquires through their lifetime. May it be their environment, their teachings, their traumatized life, etc. I do not wish for my children (in the future) to be confused as to what is right and wrong. Yes, loving is not wrong, but if possible, do it the right way. The purpose of 'mating' is to bore the next generation, homosexuality, will not. I do not want my children to be exposed to such that would make them think that homosexuality is normal.
And yes, I am an abundance of contradiction. The more I think, the more I contradict myself.
nana: i don't consider homosexuality to be the result of any one cause. in my older post, i also said that it could be caused by hormonal effects on a child when it's still unborn. it could also be genetic (there are several genes identified to be common in homosexuals which seem promising, but require further research). none of this can be altered or changed. you might give birth to a gay child one day, who knows.
homosexuality IS normal. sounds counterintuitive but allow me to explain.
homosexuality is a well documented phenomenon in nature and for the purpose of this discussion, we'll just say that animals by and large, with the exception of higher primates, are amoral - they have no notions of good or evil. they just are. a safe conjecture to make is that there must be something in their genetic makeup that determines homosexual behaviour. since homosexual animals do not pass their genes down, why are homosexuality still prevalent, ubiquitous and NORMALLY found in MOST animals? this suggest a biological imperative to retain the ability for an animal to be homosexual in its lineage. so how can being homosexual help? An example: studies in bonobos apes (a close relative of your regular chimps) show that the practice of homosexuality in their tribes reduces aggression, sexual competition and murder within their family units. the chimpanzee, which has a lesser prevalence of homosexuality in their populations, tend to experience more infighting and violence. sex may be used to procreate and produce offspring, but it can also be adapted to serve other functions - as the example above demonstrates. the phenotype of homosexuality in bonobos is what evolutionary biologists call a "spandrel". a related evobio concept is "exaptation" where some organ which initially evolved to serve one function evolved further to serve another. like feathers in birds which was evolved for thermoregulation, but were later used for flight. gender and sex (and thus, heterosexual mating) evolved to help increase genetic variations in offsprings, but it doesn't mean that there couldn't be any other possible expressions of funtionality - like homosexuality. a completely heterosexual species is considered an ABNORMALITY in nature. this is all very sketchy and simplified but to run you through a thorough curriculum in evolutionary biology is impossible here.
the rigid mindset which you apply to mating is based on emotions and on religious dogma - not science. strictly speaking, there is no "right" way.
for a short list of well-documented homosexual behaviour in animals, see my older post on homosexuality. for more, i refer you to joan roughgarden's excellent book, "evolution's rainbow". you have a gap in your education to fill if you want to speak confidently on what's "normal".
on the other hand, if you equate normality with the majority - that is flawed thinking as well. homosexuality is a minority, but it NORMALLY occurs in human populations no matter which culture or age you look into - wherever in the world you are. it's always been here. in ancient greece, the civilisation which brought us democracy and much philosophy when the world is still a dark, stupid, ignorant place, they view homosexuality as an unavoidable part of humanity as well. expression of gay love is on par with heterosexual love in their culture.
when i make any statements, i try to do so from a position of authority of science, history and anthropology. before so quickly condemning something as right or wrong, i feel an intellectually honest person ought to really learn and investigate it thoroughly first. i meant my previous comment to be my last but i feel it would be irresponsible for me to leave your latest opinions unaddressed. they might mislead others (tho' i'm sure you don't mean to intentionally). martin ssempa also justifies discrimination by making claims that are simply untrue :)
well that was the most boring conversation i have ever skipped
beve: and yours is the most pointless comment i've ever glanced at. good thing i wasn't talking to you eh?
nanged
you've mentioned that homosexuality is prevalent and normal in the animal kingdom, but what is the percentage. is your normal 0.1% out of the entire population or 50% out of the entire population?
and please do not use this fanatics to put a bad name on religion. these are not even religious people. they are merely propagating their own views using religion as a tool. don't turn this issue into an anti-religious post.
people from all walks of life commit crimes against humanity. whether against homosexuals or against straight or against anyone. and they do not come from merely religious background. look at the communist countries.
religion on itself is not bad. even atheism. it's what we humans make out of it that counts. your anti-Christianity post on itself is sickening. if you wish to engage the Christians and to promote understanding, the first thing you need to take in mind is not to overgeneralize that all Christians are bad etc. if not you would be just like the pastor up there.
I'm catholic but I'm don't judge people to be evil because of their sexuality!
I hate christians sects and other groups like that who have such narrow minded views of the world. This is why genocides and ethnocentrism occurs!
Lukey Cher Hong: to quote my older post;
"It was estimated that 25% of all male black swans are homosexuals, 60% of all sexual activities between Bonobos apes are between two or more females, and homosexual behaviour has been documented in every single species of great apes on this planet (a group which includes gorillas, chimps, orangutans and yes, humans). Almost half of all sexual pairings between elephants are of the same-sex variety - with the homosexual relationships between males reportedly being more permanent and less fleeting compared to heterosexual encounters. And the great shaggy macho lions? 8% of mountings are male on male. The female whiptail lizards are so gay that the males of the species are actually facing the danger of extinction."
and i clearly differentiated the ugandan christians from the usual breed we see in say, malaysia, to quote myself again;
"... this foul breed of alleged Christians..."
"... this is a place where despicable Christian and Muslim men..."
"... a trio of widely discredited American evangelical Christian kooks..."
"... This is the brand of Christianity that Martin Ssempa engenders..."
"... What are all you enlightened, loving, moderate Christians going to do about it?..."
so i posit this question to you, what are you going to do about the bigotry that martin ssempa promotes in the name of christ? from what i can see, all you did is criticise me without grounds. besides, do you deny that the bible (leviticus, 1 corinthians, etc) promotes the discrimination of homosexual? those verses are in themselves bad. and you call my post sickening?
and for the record, atheism is not a religion. to say it is one is to say that not-collecting stamp is a hobby.
Jan: your heart is in the right place then :) to quote gandhi, ""I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
ops my bad for not reading your old post. and you couldn't blame me on getting a little fired up, after all, when someone criticize something you feel for you'll get fired up. just like you when the pastor criticized homosexuality.
and yeah though i cannot deny that the verses in the bible says that, i also believe that you have used some of the bible verse yourself that says we must love each and everyone. i'm one of the "enlightened, loving, moderate Christians" out there who thinks that faith is a matter between one person and God and what that person wanna do with his faith is entirely up to himself. provided he don't go murdering other people, which is why i condemn the Ugandan bill too, and if he thinks that homosexuality is alright, then go ahead.
and btw, i'm not saying atheism is a religion. the opposite of religion is atheism. i'm merely highlighting the point that when you say that many crimes are committed by religious people, please bear in mind that there are those without religion that does so too. so please don't overgeneralize.
Lukey Cher Hong: again, where in my post did i overgeneralise? did i say that all christians are like martin ssempa and his friends? i believe i've made it quite explicit in my previous comment that i don't and didn't generalise anything. the thing is, are all these murderous homophobic dogs truly NOT christians? i disagree. according to my oxford dictionary, they are without a doubt christians. it's just that they cherry-picked which part of the bible they want to follow. besides, i'm sure you don't follow most biblical laws anyway - especially the misogynistic ones.
and i want to highlight the point that when religious people commit crimes against humanity, they do it in the name of religion. how many atheists do harm in the name of atheism? i only know of one psycho serial killer who did so.
yes, they may do it in the name of religion, so what? people who kill use all sort of reasons to justify their crimes. are u saying that if we abolish religion, there would be less killings?
Lukey Cher Hong: the short answer is yes. the long answer: people who use any means possible (faith, politics, bigotry, etc) to do harm will still do harm. but for the people who honestly believe that they are doing god's work; they would no longer commit atrocities without the directives of faith. we may never be able to completely eliminate the stain of murder from humanity, but yes, there would be less of it if there's no religion in this world to console them that the horrible things they do are okay by god.
are you saying, lukey, that all the horrible things done by religious people throughout history are committed only by people who are only using religion as an excuse? who's overgeneralising now?
by saying that i assume that you think that religion only brings about nothing but only bad effects to the society? and it would do no good? well, marx thought the same way as u. which is why communism came about and why religion was outlawed in communist countries. see where it got them? human rights abuse still and do happen even in countries who chose to ban religion. sometimes, the abuse is even worse than countries with religion. on my honest opinion, i think you're choosing to focus too much on the bad side of religion and fail to take into account the benefits of it too. the problem does not lie with religion itself, but the people.
erm, in what sentence did i say horrible things done in history are only done by religious people? i think u got the wrong idea.
Lukey Cher Hong: the teachings of religion aren't so much the problem as the attitude the abrahamic religions cultivate in their followers. one which discourages the questioning of authority, one of credulity and acceptance of "facts" without evidence. communist states encourages the same thing. as for marx, you might want to look deeper into his writings - you cannot blame him for what communism has become, his irreligious views notwithstanding. and if you delve into my archive, you'd see that i am also very critical of the human rights and free speech/information violations committed by communist china.
i criticise everything that's bad, not just religion, lukey. i would concede that some religions have had a better a track record than most (the majority of buddhism comes to mind) but judaism, christianity and islam remains at the top of the list of religions which have brought more ill than help to mankind. my bookmarks folder are full of shit that modern christians and muslims do to humanity that I planned to write about at a later date but could never find the time to do so. i did not choose to focus "too much" on the bad side as you've accused me of doing. it just happens that you are ignorant of just how big the bad side really is. plus, even if religions really did do as much good as you seem to think they do, would you mind telling me why i shouldn't still criticise them when they fucked up?
also, would u tell me which communist country in existence today ban religions outright? they usually only discourage religion because communist governments do not want to split their power with the church; because they want the total obeisance of their people.
lastly, can you tell me one good thing a religious person can do which an atheist cannot perform?
replied to ur comment in my blog. too lazy to reply 2 sides
Post a Comment