“Rights” Groups

Whenever I see groups who claim to be victims’ rights advocates, I wonder why these people have taken the responsibility of anointing themselves the arbiters and guardians of the so-called rights of specific and politically targeted groups are generally silent when those people whom they claim to protect are violated and in need of defending.

For example, the so-called women’s rights’ groups who loudly and publicly proclaim their fight against any and all forms of sexism that infringes on the freedom of women by advancing what amounts to a radical form of feminism.  They proclaim even louder their intentions to perpetually fight to maintain the legality of a woman’s ‘right’ to ‘choose’.

That a woman has the “right” to legally kill her unborn baby without fear of prosecution and imprisonment, is proof the woman is nothing but free.  Second the sexism they usually dispute is subjective and typically involves an underlying political motive.

If these women were truly concerned about the “rights” and freedoms of women, why are they consistently silent when example after example presents itself in the Muslim world of women being tortured, dehumanized and killed based on false testimony and no evidence? It seems as if they would prefer to fight for women to have the legal right to kill their babies rather than fight for the rights of women not to be killed themselves.

What about so-called gay-rights groups? They spend their time and money trying to force the culture-changing redefinition of marriage down America’s throats because to do so is a matter of “acceptance,” “tolerance” and “civil rights.” These “rights” groups falsely claim that gays and lesbians are being discriminated against because the majority of Americans refuse to give into their radical demands which stand against traditional American culture and all cultures that preceded America during the course of recorded human history.

But why are these groups not fighting for the rights of gays and lesbians in the Muslim world who are castrated, stoned, tortured and killed simply for being gay? Why aren’t they fighting for gays that are imprisoned because their sexual preference is thought to be contagious? These so-called gay rights groups are always denouncing homophobia- real but mostly imagined- yet are consistently silent regarding the treatment of homosexuals in third-world countries where actual- and many times deadly- homophobia exists.

What about the so-called “colored” organizations? One organization which proudly and demonstrably proclaims itself as America’s oldest civil rights organization, a purposeful reliance on their historical pedigree for moral credibility to justify their relevance on contemporary issues– claims to fight against the racial discrimination- real or imagined- of people of color.

Yet they refuse to fight against racial discrimination such as slavery that currently exists in many African countries and parts of the middle East where Arab Muslims still trade and own African slaves.  Why are they not acknowledging the violation of the human rights of those enslaved Africans?  Closer to home, why are they silent regarding the slaughter of blacks by other blacks in the city of Chicago? The situation has gotten so bad that the city has been nicknamed Chicongo because of the increasing violence and heightening murder rate, which topped 500 in 2012 and eight days into this year, is currently outpacing that number.

What about the Latino “rights” organizations? They fight for the rights of illegal immigrants who proudly and publicly flaunt their illegality, arguing that their criminality shouldn’t preclude them from receiving social, economic benefits and pleasures at the expense of legal immigrants and American citizens. Yet they conveniently ignore how harshly and inhumanely the Mexican government treats Guatemalans and other ethnically-Latino groups who attempt to emigrate from Central America into Mexico.

What these groups demonstrate is their hypocrisy regarding their stated missions and actual intentions. These groups intend to slowly and ‘progressively’ imbibe America with a destructive political and ideological worldview. They’re not concerned with the rights of those victims who are violated and in desperate need of voices to help mitigate their suffering.  I think it’s indicative of the fact that we live in such bored, secured and pampered society that so many people would rather invent representations of evil to self-righteously fight, rather than having the courage to fight against the actual evil that pervades our world.

The Spiritual Emptiness of Atheism

This is the time of year when belligerent atheists corral their fellow freethinkers together to partake in emboldened attempts to legally prevent and disrupt the displays of the Nativity wherever possible. Wherever these innocent- and usually welcomed- nativity scenes present themselves, there’s a bitter and selfish atheist threatening or attempting to sue local authorities or governing bodies because somehow, the public display of the baby Jesus in a manger is “offensive” to their irreligious sensibilities.  In their nonsensical pursuits, these litigation-minded atheists continually cite the so-called separation clause of the First Amendment as a justification for their actions at the expense of the free-exercise clause contained within the same law.  To the shock and dismay of a decreasing number of people, the God-less intentions of atheism appears to be gaining credibility due to the number of legal decisions in their favor.

Notice that this is the only time of year (for now) these atheists present themselves or their cause.  I’ve seen a few atheists plead their empty cases during the Easter season, but Christmastime is when they’re the most aggressive.  And the question is why? After all, if atheism had any inherent and practical worth as a belief system, these atheists would attempt to engage the wider culture based on the philosophical merits of their belief system on a year-round basis rather than offending and insulting the devout by poking their collective finger in the eye of believers. It appears as if atheists endeavor to make those who revere the religious aspect of Christmas as miserable as they are.

Also notice that it’s only against the God recognized and worshipped in Christianity that these militant atheists take offense. They don’t seem to display the same religious fervor during the month of the Hajj or Ramadan probably because it’s easier to bully and intimidate those who employ “turn(ing) the other cheek” as a central tenet of their belief system than it is to bully those who employ “kill the infidel.”

But notice something else.  Last week after 20 children and six adults were massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut, many people in the media, on social networking sites and in the city of Newtown itself were sending their prayers to residents of the town- victims, families of victims and residents alike.  On Facebook and Twitter, many people offered Bible verses in sincere and sympathetic attempts to provide comfort and understanding to those directly and indirectly affected by what happened. Stories were written how clergy members were discarding their prepared sermons to discuss the tragedy and how suffering and evil is an unfair part of life.

Likewise, since that horrifying tragedy occurred, numerous religious leaders have been interviewed by the media regarding the nature of God, suffering, evil and justice and how we make sense of it all.  Among the clergy have been several Catholic priests, several rabbis and Jim Solomon, pastor of New Hope Community Church in Newtown Connecticut. The local community, still in shock and struggling to understand what had happened, gathered Friday night for a prayer vigil at St. Rose of Lima Roman Catholic Church. Several more vigils at local churches were planned for the following Monday evening.

Yet of all the ecclesiastics interviewed and of all the vigils planned, there was no mention of any clerical skeptics or freethinking clergymen represented or invited. Of all the vigils, none were held in non-descript buildings devoid of religious or spiritual accoutrements- and for good reason.  Atheism is an empty belief system that doesn’t offer its adherents comfort, hope, emotional solace or spiritual sustenance when the world goes bad; in other words, it has no understanding of- or response to- sin and the product of sin, which is evil.  Atheism doesn’t provide a notion of divine justice- reward or punishment, heaven or hell- for acts of goodness or overwhelming evil, respectively whereas Christianity does. Atheism simply…is.

It would be insincere and offensive to claim that there aren’t atheists who sympathize with the grief felt by the citizens of Newtown.  It would also be disingenuous to suggest that many atheists don’t celebrate the joy of Christmas because to do so would be absurd.  And it would be equally disingenuous to say that atheists aren’t or can’t be decent people.  There are numerous atheists who celebrate Christmas and atheists who in their heart-felt sympathy have compassion regarding what happened in Newtown- and I know some of them and they’re good people. But atheism as a belief system represented by those whose purpose is to agitate, bully and offend, it’s spiritually and morally bankrupt and found wanting.

Psalm 46:1 says, “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.”  Indeed he is.

May God bless the Christmas season and may he bless and comfort the city of Newtown, Connecticut.