Society | Way of the Mind

Tag Archive for 'society'

Pro-Forced Maternity

Published

on May 25, 2007

in definitions, freedom, morality, religion and society

. 51 Comments

A little more than a year ago, I wrote a post called “Letting the Bad Guys Name Things“, warning about an increasingly common tactic: name something bad after something uncontestably positive, and your opponents will be reticent to speak against it, even if they realize how badly named it is. For instance, pass a law removing freedoms from people, but call it “Freedom Something”, and everyone will stay silent, because nobody want to be seen as “anti-freedom”. A well-known example is the Patriot Act.

But this post is about another one: “pro-life”. It’s a misleading label, of course, since what they are really about is banning sex outside of marriage, for religious reasons. (Either that, or they haven’t really thought about it, and just go with what feels good: “we’re saving lives!”). Still, it’s a well-chosen one (in marketing terms). After all, who wants to be seen as “anti-life”? That sounds almost like a murderer, or something…

The “antidote” to this problem is to refuse to use their misleading terms, and, instead, call things what they really are. I could give many examples here about the Bush administration, the “war on terror”, the invasion of Iraq, the fact that abortion clinic bombers aren’t called “Christian terrorists”, and so on. But what this post is really about is a term the author of No More Hornets came up with: Pro-Forced Maternity.

I believe this term is infinitely more honest and accurate than “pro-life”. It’s describes what they really want, what they really are about. Not “life”, but control. To force others. And, so, I think we atheists / humanists / secularists ought to spread it. Refuse to use their misleading terms, and describe things as they really are.

So, please, if you agree with this, help spreading the word. Write / blog about this, start using “pro-forced maternity” in conversations, and correct others when they use the common, misleading term (much like the Patriot Act isn’t really about “patriotism”). If this ever reaches the mainstream media (which is perfectly possible), even if they try to “denounce” it as evil secularist propaganda, it could make a lot of people think about this for the first time, and see the ~~“pro-lifers”~~ pro-forced maternity people for what they really are: anti-life, and anti-individual freedom.

Nine Eleven

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on September 11, 2006

in fanaticism, politics, society, terrorism and violence

. 27 Comments

Five years ago today, something terrible happened. Without warning, thousands of innocents were killed by a terrorist attack, which changed the world… for the worse.

Even though I’m not American, I remember feeling shocked and horrified that day. Things like that simply didn’t happen in a civilized world… or did they? And all those deaths. It was something dreadful, and anyone who says that America “deserved it” - whether it’s other terrorists, fundamentalist Muslim leaders, or Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson - is a moronic, disgusting human being.

Yet, to a group of people, it was the best thing that could have happened.

What’s changed since 2001?

People remain paranoid about terrorist attacks. People believe that terrorists may strike at any moment - much like the climate of nuclear fear in the 1950s.

America is more nationalist than ever, up to a “my country, right or wrong” point; anyone who says the United States may have acted wrongly is a “pinko commie liberal traitor”, or something like that.

The world economy is worse than it was in many decades. In the 90s everything grew, in the 2000s everything shrank. Things are still so bad that many people believe that employers do employees a favor by employing them, instead of it being a fair trade which benefits both sides, as any employment should be.

America is more religious and fundamentalist than ever. Many attempts against science have been made by religious groups, for religious purposes. Stem cell research and abortions are fundamentally “evil”, but a brain dead woman must be kept alive at all costs. Separation between church and state is increasingly becoming a myth, and the Constitution is constantly spat on by lying politicians who insist that “America was founded on Christian principles”. And no, it wasn’t.

By assuming a state of “perpetual war” against a concept such as “terror”, instead of a tangible enemy, a war which has already lasted longer than the US’s involvement in WWII, the government has successfully obtained “carte blanche” to do just about anything it wants. After all, in times of war, it’s “traitorous” and “unpatriotic” to criticize the government or the president. They say so, and people believe it. The president actually becomes above the law. Gee, why not be at war at all times, then? Which, of course, is exactly the case today.

The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act. Illegal wiretapping. Arrests and imprisonment without trial. Secret prisons. Torture. Need I go on about the huge loss of freedom? And yet they say they’re fighting for it…

A couple of wars have been started, and at least one of them was based on lies, greed for oil, and the “be in a permanent state of war” absolute power that I mentioned above. A lot of people were fooled by those lies, and whoever wasn’t was, again, branded “a traitor” and “unpatriotic”. Or “a liberal”, or “an appeaser”, or…

Before, he was an unpopular president who had “won” an election in uncertain terms, and had his “victory” handed out to him by a court. But George W. Bush, in a couple of hours, became a “hero” and a “savior”, the “defender of the land of the free”. And won the next election, which would never have happened if Americans were judging him for the state of the economy, the conditions of living, and so on. Hmm, I bet he was really sad when 9/11 happened…

The rest of the world isn’t much better. By not standing up to the United States’ policies, both the EU and the UN lost most of their credibility. Almost everyone outside the US knew that the stated reasons for the Iraq war were obvious lies, and yet nobody had the courage to do a thing about it.

In short, the world is now much worse than it was.

Blame the terrorists first? Sure. Note that I haven’t mentioned any of the theories that say that the Bush administration knew about 9/11 and let it happen, or actually did it. It’s certainly possible - they’re the ones who benefitted by it the most - but I don’t know enough to make any accusations about it. So I won’t.

What I know is that they’re responsible for what happened afterwards. The climate of terror, the loss of civil liberties, the wars, the religious fundamentalism, the international bullying, the “either you’re with us or against us - and therefore a traitor” attitude… I blame Bush and everyone around him for that.

I don’t know about you, but if I had lost someone in 9/11, I’d despise anyone who used my pain for his own gains. Even if he was the president.

Murderous children: innocents?

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on February 23, 2006

in collectivism, relativism, society and violence

. 8 Comments

If you don’t speak Portuguese, you probably won’t understand this news article, but it’s like this: a group of minors, between 10 and 15 years old, have just murdered a homeless man, in Oporto, Portugal. Apparently, they stoned and kicked him to death.

Surprisingly, not much has been said yet (though I admit I don’t watch TV or listen to radio, I only read news sites), other than a couple of politicians saying “I’m shocked!”. But, having lived in Portugal all my life, I can easily see where this is going. Politicians here, who sometimes remind me of Atlas Shrugged villains, are probably going to say that the kids are minors according to the law, that they aren’t responsible for their actions, that they are the true victims, that this is all society’s fault, that they can’t possibly be seen, or treated, as criminals, that all children are innocent, that this or that is to blame, and so on. In other words, collectivism, and the denial of that bothersome thing called “personal responsibility”.

I can bet that no one among them will be punished in any way. I really, really hope I am wrong… but I’ve seen how justice works here.

Me, my belief is this: by commiting murder (and it’s murder, make no mistakes), they lost the right to be treated as “innocent” children. By acting like adults, and doing one of the worst things an adult can do (killing an innocent, just for fun), they should be treated as adults, and punished as such.

What do you people think? Should their young age make a difference here?

The "War on Christmas" in America

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on December 21, 2005

in fanaticism, religion and society

. 16 Comments

First, a disclaimer: I’m European (Portuguese, in fact). I read a lot of blogs and sites from the U.S., though.

A current controversy in the U.S. seems to be the so-called “War on Christmas”. In short, it’s like this: Americans tend to be quite fanatical about everything related to religion - including the lack of it -, and are also easily offended. (No, I’m not saying all are like this, but these are certainly the ones who make the most noise.)

So, some time ago, it was “decided” that saying “merry Christmas” is endorsing Christianity - which, of course, means insulting all other religions. After complaints, and since store chains are paranoid about offending anyone, many chains made it a nation-wide policy not to say “merry Christmas”, but something like “happy holidays”, or “season’s greetings”.

Naturally, the other side didn’t like it, and speak of a “War on Christmas” by “ultra-liberal organizations” (what does that mean, anyway?). And polemic ensues - it’s “us against them”, it’s a battle between the “forces of secularism” trying to “destroy Christmas” (and Christianity, in general), and those who “stalwartly defend” it.

Now, thinking rationally for a while… don’t you think that all of that is a bit ridiculous?

In Europe, we don’t tend to be so fanatical. Neither our Christians, nor our atheists, nor those of other religions. “Merry Christmas”, to most people, doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with religion - Christians may celebrate the birth of Jesus, while everyone else has a holiday where the family eats codfish (in Portugal) or turkey or something else, together, then give gifts to each other. Simple as that.

“Merry Christmas” doesn’t offend anyone. Why should it? It’s a holiday, except to Christians.

Or am I oversimplifying things?

Blog: The Martian Anthropologist

Published

Pedro Timóteo

on October 10, 2005

in happiness, religion, society and work

. 4 Comments

A blog which I discovered through BlogExplosion, and which I now read regularly, is The Martian Anthropologist. Here’s an example of a recent article:

When is the last time you saw a bird slaving away for 50 hours a week? Has it ever occurred to you to ask why humans have to, but the other animals on this planet don’t have to?
There is a lie that most humans have bought into; that they must work constantly until they are too old to enjoy life, and only then can they stop working without guilt.
Working until you are 65 at a job you don’t particularly like, then retiring, is a lie. And it has been a lie for so long, people now think that there is no other way.

(full article here)