I second Peter’s motion. Religions are not “faiths”, they are “prides”. They are about loyalty and community, not validity nor reality.
As for “who created God?”, that’s the Paradox of Origin: what caused the first cause? I know only three possibilities:
1. The Endless Line. Each cause has a cause, which has a cause, and so on infinitely, so there is no first cause.
2. The Ray. There’s a first cause, and it is uncaused.
3. The Loop. There’s a first cause, which has a cause, which it causes, so causation flows in a loop.
None of these theories satisfy. The first is infinite, the second is chaotic, and the third is loopy. If I had to choose, I’d reluctantly favor the Loop, especially if the loop encompasses all causation, with a Final Effect causing the First Cause.
And as for ‘what is a woman?”: sex is not gender. Sex is biological; it’s about DNA and anatomy. Gender is psychosocial; it’s about beliefs and practices. Sex is on a spectrum, but it’s a highly bimodal spectrum. Gender is all over the place.
It is folly to legislate sex; that’s a biomedical matter, beyond the competence of politicians and priests. It is tyrannical to legislate gender; that’s a matter of faith, in a society (and species) that worships sex, and therefore is protected under the First Amendment.
paradoctor: Please remember: the First Amendment (to The Constitution) only applies to the USA and its inmates/inhabitants and does not apply generally, ie to the rest of humankind.
No one can define “fish” either. Biologically (in terms of species relationship), there’s no category that includes all fish and excludes humans.
And by the way, “species” isn’t easily definable either. Around the world, seagull populations breed with adjacent populations – but go all the way around, and the ends of the chain overlap, but don’t breed with each other.
So if anyone says “define woman” like that’s an argument against treating trans people like people, ask them to define fish.
Define woman? Define fish? All right then; define “bicycle”.
Son of Glenner: Sure, and I’m addressing the gender wars in national terms. I admit that it’s a bit nonstandard to point out that humans worship sex, and therefore the forms of fucking are a religious matter, in which we Americans have Constitutional liberty. But it’s true; humans do worship sex.
Sure, the animals called “fish” in English belong to at least 3 classes. But that isn’t a problem, if someone asks you to define “fish.” It’s a member of one of the following classes: Agnatha, Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes.
In cocoa’s realm where sweet desires entwine,
A jock strap crafted from the finest chocolate,
A playful twist, a fantasy so divine,
A sensual treat that’s hard to forget.
Its form, a sculpted marvel, rich and dark,
Molded with care and artisan’s delight,
A confectionary work, a daring mark,
In passion’s dance, it sets the mood just right.
Silken threads of caramel wrap around,
Intriguing textures, hidden treasures lie,
A secret whispered, in moments so profound,
Where love and chocolate, desires multiply.
In this sweet sonnet, we shall boldly share,
The love for chocolate, a flavor so rare.
– chatGPT
I struggle to know just what this means,
But now I have brown streaks in my blue jeans.
Anyway the internet play-zone has just informed me that temperature play is all the rage nowadays…so get out your melted dark chocolate to drip on the body in an orgasmic exploration into the darker side of Charlie and the chocolste factory…
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
March 11, 2011
😂😂 funny this one, I like it
Weakness and Inconsistency. Anybody with an IQ above 70 can see that religious dogma demands FAITH because it’s all bollocks! Or can they?
M27Holts, I’m pretty sure it’s never a matter of capacity, but rather willingness.
I second Peter’s motion. Religions are not “faiths”, they are “prides”. They are about loyalty and community, not validity nor reality.
As for “who created God?”, that’s the Paradox of Origin: what caused the first cause? I know only three possibilities:
1. The Endless Line. Each cause has a cause, which has a cause, and so on infinitely, so there is no first cause.
2. The Ray. There’s a first cause, and it is uncaused.
3. The Loop. There’s a first cause, which has a cause, which it causes, so causation flows in a loop.
None of these theories satisfy. The first is infinite, the second is chaotic, and the third is loopy. If I had to choose, I’d reluctantly favor the Loop, especially if the loop encompasses all causation, with a Final Effect causing the First Cause.
And as for ‘what is a woman?”: sex is not gender. Sex is biological; it’s about DNA and anatomy. Gender is psychosocial; it’s about beliefs and practices. Sex is on a spectrum, but it’s a highly bimodal spectrum. Gender is all over the place.
It is folly to legislate sex; that’s a biomedical matter, beyond the competence of politicians and priests. It is tyrannical to legislate gender; that’s a matter of faith, in a society (and species) that worships sex, and therefore is protected under the First Amendment.
paradoctor: Please remember: the First Amendment (to The Constitution) only applies to the USA and its inmates/inhabitants and does not apply generally, ie to the rest of humankind.
No one can define “fish” either. Biologically (in terms of species relationship), there’s no category that includes all fish and excludes humans.
And by the way, “species” isn’t easily definable either. Around the world, seagull populations breed with adjacent populations – but go all the way around, and the ends of the chain overlap, but don’t breed with each other.
So if anyone says “define woman” like that’s an argument against treating trans people like people, ask them to define fish.
That’s not a little bit fishy, Chris Phoenix: then no one can define trans either. 🙂
Sigh…when did life suddenly become a social game of “Lets pretend”….suppose it’s only just changed from small groups to society in general?
Define woman? Define fish? All right then; define “bicycle”.
Son of Glenner: Sure, and I’m addressing the gender wars in national terms. I admit that it’s a bit nonstandard to point out that humans worship sex, and therefore the forms of fucking are a religious matter, in which we Americans have Constitutional liberty. But it’s true; humans do worship sex.
Sure, the animals called “fish” in English belong to at least 3 classes. But that isn’t a problem, if someone asks you to define “fish.” It’s a member of one of the following classes: Agnatha, Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes.
Worship sex eh. Haha , I have just been inaugurated as bash-the-bishop , Doctor Mondo…High Priest to the Bondage Cage of the chocolate jockstrap….
M27Holts: Chocolate jockstrap? Sounds a bit uncomfortable!
Author, please can we have a cartoon featuring Webley the Archbishop of Bullshit.
SOG. If your significant other likes chocolate and is hungry…
In cocoa’s realm where sweet desires entwine,
A jock strap crafted from the finest chocolate,
A playful twist, a fantasy so divine,
A sensual treat that’s hard to forget.
Its form, a sculpted marvel, rich and dark,
Molded with care and artisan’s delight,
A confectionary work, a daring mark,
In passion’s dance, it sets the mood just right.
Silken threads of caramel wrap around,
Intriguing textures, hidden treasures lie,
A secret whispered, in moments so profound,
Where love and chocolate, desires multiply.
In this sweet sonnet, we shall boldly share,
The love for chocolate, a flavor so rare.
– chatGPT
I struggle to know just what this means,
But now I have brown streaks in my blue jeans.
-postdoggerel
Help. I was searching the interweb for chocolate jockstraps and it brought me here. What on earth is this place?
A twilight zone for the unwary surfer….you are washed up on the beach of unrelenting logic my friend….
Anyway the internet play-zone has just informed me that temperature play is all the rage nowadays…so get out your melted dark chocolate to drip on the body in an orgasmic exploration into the darker side of Charlie and the chocolste factory…
M27 wise words, mon ami. I’m resisting the temptation to make a joke about a Careless Whisper