“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

Friday, September 21, 2007

Would somebody please answer the phone?

How can a nation full of intelligent, educated, industrious people paradoxically co-exist with mindless zealots who believe in a monkey god?

CHENNAI, India (AFP) — A state leader in India has dismissed a deity worshipped by millions as a "big lie", deepening a highly sensitive row over plans to dredge a shipping lane through an area sacred to Hindus.

The shipping project involves dredging a lane through Adam's bridge, a chain of islands between India and Sri Lanka. At the moment, ships moving between the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal also need to travel around Sri Lanka.

The Hindu epic Ramayana says the geographic feature was built by an army of monkeys to allow the god Ram to cross the narrow strip of sea and rescue his kidnapped wife from a demon.

So this is why I haven't been able to get through to tech support.....they're all out protesting on behalf of their monkey god.


Anonymous said...

Like that is any different than believing god has bastard children with virgin Jewish women?

ed said...

I take it you're an atheist, anon? Or at the least, agnostic?

Kevin said...

I personally don't think that what they think is absurd. It may sound silly, but its what they believe and we can't think of them differently for that. And on top of that, their story scientifically is more believable than God creating man.

Anonymous said...

I am agnostic, as such I can't really say what is right and what is wrong. I don't have a problem with people's personal beliefs as log as they are not forced uponn me. I just have a problem when people who emphatically believe in one religion mock another for its' supposed ridiculousness. They all sound equally ridiculous when described in a certain way. But like I said, I am an agostic so I really believe I don't know and I am ok with that.

I also do agree with Kevin, eastern religions like taoism, hinduism and buddhism are more believable to me than most western ones.

Anonymous said...

kevin, you must be agnostic too, or maybe just argumentitive.

Kevin said...

No, Im just real and logical. Although some people might say I am argumentative

Anonymous said...

Isn't real and logical another description for Agnostic?

Anonymous said...

yeah, but you did say that monkeys building a bridge across water is believable...how "real and logical" is that?

believing in something unseen and unproven is the definition of faith. If you limit your mind to only that which you can see, you're like a rat in a cheese maze, with no possibility of conceiving of the outside or the unkonwn.

we can prove unequivocally however, that monkeys cannot build bridges(except in Missouri). Otherwise they would have continued to do so.

lastly, while the concept of God cannot be proven or seen, unlike the monkey bridge, it cannot be disproven either.

Anonymous said...

i think perhaps he was talking about the overall philosophy of the religion and not one instance of monkey bridge building.

Anonymous said...

this whole thread is in reference to criticism of ed for poking fun of another religion, and the question of how more believable is his apparent religion when compared to one which believes vehemently that monkeys once built a bridge. i believe anon 10:32 was defending the believability point rather than the larger existential point.

Kevin said...

No real and logical does not make me agnostic. I do not consider myself agnostic, as i believe in gods. You could compare my beliefs to that of the Greeks and Romans.
Now about this monkey building a bridge. It never specifies what kind of bridge, nor how it was made. Now building it out of steel, or even wood, might not be believable but the fact of the matter is that it isn't specified, which means it certainly is possible. Just about any religion can be looked at this way because religions are very vague, and in being vague, can be interpreted many different ways, and cannot be disproved (with exception to Scientology, which is just silly).