Many of you are aware of what the Christian addicts who’ve taken over the Texas board of education have done. Blinded by their addictions, prejudices and other views, they’ve decided to revise history to make it more palatable for them by, among other things, getting rid of Jefferson since he didn’t accept that whole divinity of Jesus thing and he wrote that there is a wall of separation between church and state (which annoys them so much they eliminated the term ‘separation of church and state’ altogether), making sure students don’t learn that our constitution prevents the government from favoring one religion over others, and getting rid of or glossing over all that awful, non-white stuff like hip-hop music, the Civil Rights movement and the fact that there were Tejanos who also died fighting for texas at the Alamo. There’s a whole lot of more crazy shit they’ve changed, but I thought if they’re REALLY going to go off the rails, why not go all the way, like this?
Yes, Abraham Lincoln as a vampire hunter. What a fantastic idea! Tell me you wouldn’t have payed more attention in class if this was the history lesson. Ha! What’s great is it seems that this work of fiction actually is more plausible than the fiction Texas is serving as history. You’d have to be blind to ignore the influence of hip-hop, think McCarthyism had value or not wonder why there’s next to no mention of that Civil Rights thing as well as how that makes so many other things not make sense, but there doesn’t seem to be the same issues in Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter. Beard? Hid a scar from fighting vampires. Long jacket? Hid his ax used for decapitating vampires (which everyone knows you need to decapitate them or else they might come back). But of course the Texas Christian addicts can’t think rationally enough to make their revisions make sense because they’re high on Jesus.
Now I often refer to religious belief as a vice, or more specifically an addictive vice comparable to drugs and alcohol. As someone who likes his own vices, I’ll never seek to deny others theirs (despite the fear mongering of the religious, very few atheists actively seek to deny religious freedom), but I do demand that ALL vices be indulged in responsibly. For instance, I’m not going to drive or do anything which could put myself or others at risk while inebriated, and I would hope that others would do the same, but the religious rarely do. They block essential research, prevent the viewing or sales of certain things, deny some Americans equality and perform many, many more terrible acts while under the influence of their religious beliefs. Imo, it’s no different than this clown who, high on heroin, ran naked down a highway jumping on cars saying he was both the Christian god and devil. The money quote from that story was this:
Peterson said the man, “who was acting like he was under the influence of a narcotic,” ran toward an officer and ignored commands to stop, so he was shot with the Taser.
Wouldn’t it be nice if those who threaten others with their addictions could be tasered when they put others at risk? The entire Board of Education in Texas would need a tasering, but unfortunately in this country, religion is the one vice which everyone is allowed to indulge in with no thought to the potential harm for others which may come from your inebriated actions. There even had to be a trial for the Neumanns who killed their child while under the influence, and who I feel didn’t get what they fully deserved as punishment. We’re still a long way away from even the point at where drunks were treated in the Andy Griffith Show, comically mocked and held in a cell until they slept it off.
This morning though, I found that the US is not alone in allowing the religious special treatment for their indulgences. A man just won an apology for having to remove his hood. From where? The British unemployment centre. Why? Because he’s a Jedi, or I should say he follows the Jedi religion. Fantastic! I can’t wait for the day when someone invents the first lightsaber, because you know they’re going to demand the right to carry one as a religious right.