Bring back the witch burnings! The brouhaha involving Rhode Island high school student Jessica Ahlquist, 16, who requested her school remove a prayer banner invoking '"Our Heavenly Father," serves to illustrate how the ideals of the American Founders have been trampled and corrupted by religious fanatics in this country.
However, it is Ahlquist's Constitutional right to attend a secular public school. If others wish to attend religious schools, there are plenty of those in this country. Our public schools must be kept secular, teaching religion only from a dispassionate and uninvolved perspective. Otherwise, religion must be barred from public schools. No proselytizing, no school prayers - nada.
This Constitutional "wall of separation" was further solidified by a woman named Vashti McCollum, who sued her local school board over religious indoctrination and won, in a Supreme Court ruling in 1948:
Vashti McCollum, a self-described humanist from Champaign, Ill., challenges the practice of allowing students in public schools to attend voluntary religious instruction during school hours, on school property. When her son and other students chose not to attend the classes, they are left to study alone in an empty room. McCollum sues the local school board; her family is subjected to harassment and hate mail; the family cat is lynched. The case reaches the Supreme Court, which rules 8-1 in favor of McCollum, saying the practice of holding religious classes on tax-supported property violates the Establishment Clause.
As Charles Shaynes points out, Ahlquist's request is in line not only with the American Constitution but also with the wishes of the founder of the State of Rhode Island, Rev. Roger Williams (c. 1603-1683), himself a theologian and "deeply religious Christian minister":
Jessica may be in the minority in Cranston, but she's in good company as the latest in a long line of Rhode Island dissenters — beginning with the state's founder, Roger Williams.
Williams, who was himself verbally attacked, was banished from Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1635 for objecting to the entanglement of religion and government that, he believed, corrupted both.
He founded Rhode Island as the first government in history with no established religion and a commitment to protect liberty of conscience for every person. As a deeply religious Christian minister, Williams vowed to put an end to centuries of oppression and coercion by erecting what he called "a wall or hedge of separation" between the "Garden of the Church and the Wilderness of the World."
Rhode Island was to be a "haven for the cause of conscience" where government stayed out of religion and all people (including Quakers, Catholics and others persecuted in surrounding colonies) would be free to choose in matters of faith.
If he were alive today, there's little doubt that Roger Williams would be solidly in Jessica's corner. He would view the "school prayer" banner as blasphemous state appropriation of religion. However big or small the issue, Williams believed that any state entanglement with religion violates conscience, divides society, and (most important for him) offends God....
"Jessica Ahlquist is clearly an articulate and courageous young woman, who took a brave stand, particularly in light of the hostile response she has received from her community."
Fortunately, the federal judge in this case - who made the above quote about Ahlquist - saw fit to uphold the Constitution and ruled in her favor. Naturally, the hate speech and death threats have continued to fly.
In the final analysis, the hate speech, death threats and irrational religious fanaticism displayed in Rhode Island could be deemed "un-American" and "anti-American," as well as illegal and/or immoral. Jessica Ahlquist is the true American in this situation, following the ideals of the American and Rhode Island Founding Fathers.
Moreover, I personally find the idea of a "Heavenly Father" to the exclusion of all other divine concepts, including the "Heavenly Mother" or, perhaps more appropriately, the "Earthly Mother," to be offensive to my religion. It is a sexist and human-derogating notion that I reject - so, these spewers of hate speech and death threats are offending my religion.
These Sikhs have just lumped themselves in with Muslim extremists - not a good way to bring attention to yourself and to make friends. Newsflash: America isn't India, where your ethnocentric cult is coddled by the law - and RELIGION IS NOT A RACE. The "racism" and "defamation" cards are really getting old.
This lawsuit needs to be thrown out and the plaintiffs made to bear the costs - telling jokes is surely a First Amendment right on the part of Leno. Can we sue supremacist and male-dominant religions for libeling and defaming humanity, especially the female half? Criticizing and ridiculing sexist and bigoted religious ideologies is part of my religion - who can I sue for oppressing me in my religion?
I have always liked Sikhs, a number of whom I've been friendly with over the years (some funny stories), but this wisdom-less brouhaha is very disappointing. I do have a question for Jay, however: Would you dare ridicule Islam and Muslims?
Jay Leno's really taking it on the chin over his joke about Mitt Romney last week.
Leno has taken heat from a religious group after cracking that presidential contender Romney keeps the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India, as his summer home. And how he's being sued by a religious organizer who claims that Leno libeled the entire Sikh religion with his joke.
In court papers filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Tuesday and obtained by The Wrap, Dr. Randeep Dhillon, who does business as Bol Punjabi All Regions Community Organization, claims that Leno "hurt the sentiments of all Sikh people in addition to those of the plaintiff" with his joke. Dhillon further claims that Leno's joke "clearly exposes plaintiff, other Sikhs and their religion to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy because it falsely portrays the holiest place in the Sikh religion as a vacation resort owned by a non-Sikh."
Claiming libel, Dhillon is seeking unspecified damages, plus court costs.
Since making the joke -- which was a riff on Romney's wealth -- Leno has taken heat, with one group launching an online petition against Leno. The petition claims that Leno has a history of making discriminatory comments about the Sikh religion.
"Previously, in 2007 he called Sikhs 'diaper heads.' In 2010, he remarked, falsely so, in his monolog that President Obama could not visit Sri Darbar Sahib because of requirements of wearing a turban," the petition reads. "Clearly, Jay Leno's racist comments need to be stopped right here."
NBC has not yet responded to TheWrap's request for comment.
Happy 21st! Just a reminder of this momentous occasion - I'm told spaces are filling up, so if you want to meet me in Mexico, check it out now!
Okay, folks. It's a very rare occurrence when I make a public appearance - and this "coming out" party is going to be a doozy!
In December 2012, I am scheduled to speak at the archaeological site of Chichen Itza in the Yucatan, Mexico, and you are invited!
This fabulous gathering will occur from December 13-22, 2012 and includes access onto the site on the very day of the winter solstice, a date claimed by some modern analysts to represent the end of the Mayan Calendar. This particular day is not represented in native Maya literature and tradition as the end of the calendar, but the winter solstice/"December 25th" has been celebrated in the northern hemisphere for thousands of years - and what a spectacular place to celebrate it!
The year 2012, of course, is notorious because it represents the end of one cycle in the Mayan calendar - not the end of the world. In fact, 2012 is the beginning of another cycle; thus, my talk at this gather in the Yucatan will be titled, "2012: A New Beginning." Here's the promotional summary:
At the gathering in December 2012, D.M. Murdock will be presenting a talk entitled, "2012: A New Beginning." As a specialist in comparative religion and mythology, especially as concerns its nature-worshiping or astrotheological roots, Murdock will discuss the striking parallels between Christian and Mexican religion and mythology, demonstrating a unifying thread that underlies much of human culture. Here is the encouraging and good news for the coming age determined by Mesoamerican astronomy and calendric science: We are one human family whose cultural divisions are largely based on observations of our natural surroundings, rather than actual disparities. Our diverse global cultures emanate largely from the same root, with similar basic religious and mythological archetypes. Thus, instead of loathing our differences, we can celebrate our cultural uniqueness as part of the overall human experience.
Here is a short bio:
D.M. Murdock, also known as "Acharya S," is an independent scholar of comparative religion and mythology. As an undergraduate, Murdock studied Classics, Greek Civilization, at Franklin & Marshall College, in Pennsylvania, USA. She also did post-graduate study with the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Greece. Murdock has spent the past several decades studying both formally and informally mythology, religion, history, languages, archaeology, archaeoastronomy and other disciplines relating to the fields of religious history dating back thousands of years. In addition to English, she can read, speak and/or write French, Spanish, German, Italian, ancient and modern Greek, Latin, Portuguese and a smattering of other languages such as Sanskrit, Hebrew, Egyptian, etc. Murdock frequently does research in ancient languages such as Greek, Latin, Hebrew and Sanskrit, as needed for biblical studies and early Christian history.
Murdock/Acharya is the author of several books and many articles on the subjects of comparative religion and mythology, including The Christ Conspiracy, Suns of God,Who Was Jesus?, Christ in Egypt and others. Her work has been published both online and in print in a variety of media. She has also helped create several videos, including a two-hour interview of her speaking about related subjects. Murdock has appeared in a number of documentaries, including "God in the Box," which has been featured at several film festivals. She has also appeared on numerous radio programs, including the Alan Colmes show.
For more information, click on the image below:
Note that there are other presenters at this event, and that these may change and others added. Call Power Places for details and payment information: U.S.: 800-234-TOUR; international: 001-719-448-0514.
(P.S. Also note that, separately from and in addition to the Power Places event at which I will be appearing, there will be another event at Chichen Itza that those fortunate enough to attend the Power Places event will also apparently be able to attend: A massive gathering of people from around the world, put on by UnifyEarth.com! Headliners in this "Urth" event, which will be broadcast simultaneously around the world via TV, the internet and mobile devices, include Sting and Carlos Santana. I am told that this concert and show - rumor has it that Cirque du Soleil may also be there - will be open to the public as well. So, again, those who attend my event will also be able to attend this one!)
Note from the author: Thank you for watching my video - I hope you enjoyed it. I am planning to do many more videos, including a full-length documentary based on my book The Christ Conspiracy. However, I am in need of better computer equipment to do so and do not have the funding. If you liked this effort, please consider donating to the cause of obtaining proper equipment for my new enterprise, FreethoughtFilms.com. Your support is greatly appreciated: $5, $10, $20, $50 or more - any amount will be helpful. Thank you.
Please respect my religion! by D.M. Murdock/Acharya S
We are often asked to "respect people's religions." In the first place, many religious ideas are very disrespectful to human beings and are not worthy of respect. Secondly, what about people respecting our religion in return?
The word "religion" comes from the Latinnoun religiō, which means, among other things, "scrupulousness" or "conscientiousness." In my perspective of reality, I endeavor to be extremely scrupulous and conscientious. Hence, one could call me "religious" and my perspective "religion."
My religion does not call people "infidels," "heretics," "goyim," "heathens" or "sinners," who are "other" and "alien," unlike us and worthy of contempt, exploitation or worse.
Please respect my religion.
My religion does not call for nonbelievers to be derogated, hated, subjugated or enslaved.
Please respect my religion.
My religion has no giant, anthropomorphized, male God in the sky, somewhere "out there" separate and apart from humanity who dictates our every waking moment.
Please respect my religion.
My religion says there are no divinely revealed facts straight from the mouth of God that represent the "one true faith."
Please respect my religion.
My religion neither promises heaven nor threatens hell, exploiting neither greed nor fear.
Please respect my religion.
My religion does not ask people to believe blindly and without scientific evidence in supernatural "saviors," "prophets" or "avatars" of a particular ethnicity or culture.
Please respect my religion.
My religion objects to so-called holy texts full of violence, brutality and cruelty.
Please respect my religion.
My religion prohibits the murder of women and girls in order to "protect honor."
Please respect my religion.
My religion prohibits child marriages and other forced marriages.
Please respect my religion.
My religion objects to forcing people to cover up simply because they have genitals of a particular gender.
Please respect my religion.
My religion objects to gender apartheid, in which men and women are segregated purely because of their genitals.
Please respect my religion.
My religion prohibits the mutilation of children's genitals of either gender, based on "religious" dictates.
Please respect my religion.
My religion is based on consciousness, not genitalia.
Please respect my religion.
My religion values scientific observation and humane morals, not superstitious belief and violent fanaticism.
Please respect my religion.
My religion does not allow for death or other punishment for apostasy or blasphemy, etc.
Please respect my religion.
My religion opposes invasion, rape and robbery in the name of a god.
Please respect my religion.
My religion prohibits beheading or otherwise murdering living, breathing human beings in order to defend it from "insults."
Please respect my religion.
My religion values life more than death and prohibits killing in its name.
Please respect my religion.
My religion does not allow for hand amputations for theft or stonings and hangings for adultery.
Please respect my religion.
My religion prohibits homosexuals from being hanged or otherwise murdered simply because of their sexual orientation.
Please respect my religion.
My religion treats children with kindness, love and affection, not beating them and teaching them hatred of others.
Please respect my religion.
My religion does not require prayer, once, five times or any other amount per day.
Please respect my religion.
My religion is not interested in mind control, so what you do within the privacy of your own mind is up to you, but my religion says that disrupting the public square and workplace for prayer is antisocial, aggressive and obnoxious.
Please respect my religion.
My religion objects to loud ringing of bells and shouting through loudspeakers, tormenting neighbors and causing divisiveness.
Please respect my religion.
My religion exhorts people to expose and speak out against oppression, censorship, human-rights violations and animal abuse wherever they may be found, in whatever culture or country and practiced by whatever ethnicity or religion.
Please respect my religion.
My religion calls for people to object to religious beliefs that are vicious, hateful, sexist and violent, regardless of the religion, faith, sect or cult.
Please respect my religion.
My religion calls for dignity and respect for the individual, who is free to believe or disbelieve at any given moment, as opposed to being forced to adhere to a particular religion through threats of violence and hellfire.
Please respect my religion.
My religion encourages singing, dancing, joy and general freedom to love life.
NOTE: Regarding the repetition of the phrase "Please respect my religion!," obviously, I did that for a purpose - it is part of my original writing, in which I wrote stanzas, followed by that refrain. My repetition of this phrase serves to emphasize a point, and it is little different from the refrain in a song or a poem: "Refrain" - from the Latin refringere meaning "to repeat" - is "the line or lines repeated in music or in verse."
Again, as it does in thousands of songs and other writings/poems, the repetition/refrain has a purpose - I want to make sure everyone understands that each stanza can stand alone and is part of a "doctrine," so to speak, of my "religion." I also would like to associate the phrase with the ideas in my essay/video, obviously.
In consideration of the fanaticism with which typical religious dogma is held, I felt the need to emphasize this point, commensurate with the constant drone we hear from religious fanatics. The point needs to be pounded into the head, in my opinion. If I remove this phrase, the essay loses its meaning and purpose. Nevertheless, stay tuned for an updated refrain-less version.
Do U.S. courts justify Sharia-based Crimes? By Dr. Tawfik Hamid www.tawfikhamid.com
A federal appeals court has blocked an Oklahoma voter-approved measure barring state judges from considering Islamic and international law in their decisions.
Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Oklahoma, sued to block the law from taking effect, arguing that the Save Our State Amendment violated his First Amendment rights.
The court stated "When the law that voters wish to enact is likely unconstitutional, their interests do not outweigh Mr. Awad's in having his constitutional rights protected."
Awad argued that the ban on Islamic law would likely affect every aspect of his life as well as the execution of his will upon his death. The appeals court pointed out that Awad made a strong depiction of how this ban would be potentially harmful.
"This is an important reminder that the Constitution is the last line of defense against a rising tide of anti-Muslim bigotry within our society and it is pleasing that the appeals court recognized that fact," Awad claimed. "We are also hopeful that this decision serves as a reminder to politicians wishing to score political points through fear-mongering and bigotry."
Speaking after Judge Miles-Lagrange's decision in 2010, Mr Awad said the ruling provided an opportunity to "demonstrate that Oklahoma's Muslim community simply seeks to enjoy the civil and religious rights guaranteed to all Americans."
The above comments about Sharia law do not properly depict how controversial the risks to society would be if considered. Fundamental principles of Sharia law that are not only approved but also unchallenged in Islamic Jurisprudence include the killing of Muslims who convert from Islam to another faith, the stoning of adulterers, and the killing of gays[1]. Furthermore, it justifies polygamy, pedophilia and beating women to discipline them. If the judges of the Oklahoma Court knew that the basic principles of Sharia Law promote such inhumane and derogatory acts and still lifted the ban on it, it would subsequently end in catastrophe. Not only would it be a disastrous to our society but it would also show a level of ignorance within the U.S judicial system that ultimately must be treated accordingly.
If one day Mr. Awad wanted to kill another Muslim because he converted to Christianity (or any other faith), would the Oklahoma court uphold his "constitutional right" to practice Sharia Law and kill that Muslim - as Sharia Law dictates - or will they uphold the "constitutional right" of the other Muslim to practice his "Freedom of Religion?" In other words, should the court of Oklahoma protect such constitutional rights that arouse criminal activity (an example being the killing of apostates) but not protect such constitutional rights that allow citizens to freely select their faith and convert out of Islam without being threatened? The court MUST explain this discrimination in respecting once "constitutional right" over another.
Courts must be able to find sources for Sharia Law that illustrate how it DOES NOT promote the above mentioned criminal activities. Such sources must be cited appropriately and it must be noted whether any major Islamic institution approves it. Removing the ban on Sharia Law - without showing even one single approved Sharia text that rejects the crimes mentioned above - can be seen as a form of endorsement for legalizing such criminal acts.
Some may argue that the ban on Sharia Law is discriminatory against Islam, as it did not ban other religious laws, e.g. those acts in the Old Testament that promote, what would be considered today to be, criminal activity. The answer to this point is simply that the practice of the law or the "jurisprudence" in mainstream Christianity and Judaism (for instances) clearly stands against implementing these laws in our modern day and age. Sadly, the only mainstream religious jurisprudence that still promotes and practice criminal acts - such as killing apostates - is the Islamic one (i.e. the Sharia Law). That is why we see killing apostates, stoning adulterers, and killing gays considered to be legal in Islamic countries that practice Sharia law, such as Saudi Arabia, but we do not see such practices legalized in the Vatican or in Israel.
Another argument could be that even if Sharia Law promotes the previously mentioned crimes we can only punish a person if he committed these crimes. We have a precedent that challenges this concept. The American law forbids driving with a relatively high Blood Alcohol Level (BAL) as it may lead to an accident or killing of a person. In other words, the American law criminalized driving with a high BAL despite the fact that not everyone whose BAL is high causes an accident. The law did not wait for an accident or tragedy to occur to justify criminalizing driving with a high BAL. The American law simply used consequential common sense that if driving with a high BAL increases the possibility of causing an accident then it must be considered illegal. The same principle MUST be applied to Sharia law as practicing this law can threaten other people's lives (such as the lives of apostates, adulterers, and gays) and lead to increases in the possibility of killing innocent people. In other words, as we do not wait for accidents to occur to punish drivers with a high BAL, we also cannot wait for Sharia-based crimes to occur to ban Sharia law.
The US declaration of independence clearly stated that:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The Judges who lifted the ban on Sharia law must explain to us how allowing a law that justifies the above mentioned crimes can fit with our "unalienable Rights" of Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness.
Accepting Sharia Law that shamelessly allows killing apostates, adulterers & gays AND promotes beating women, pedophilia and slavery is ultimately destructive to our unalienable Rights and as the declaration of independence stated "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government." The US courts simply do not have the right to deprive us from our "unalienable Rights!"
[1] Sharia Law also promotes Non-Violent teachings such as personal cleanness, however, the above mentioned violent principles represent integral component of it. Denying one of these principles - such as denying apostasy Law - is considered a form of Apostasy that deserves capital punishment (beheading) according to all 4 mainstream schools of Islamic Jurisprudence (Shafeii, Maleki, Hanbali, and Hanafi).
Here's a new Church/State documentary by artist Scott Burdick that features me several times, along with some comments by others that will surely ruffle a few feathers. In the video sidebar, Scott says:
When I was given a DVD of a protest rally in the small town of King, near where I live, I was shocked by the sight of five thousand people waving Christian Flags and cheering one of the speakers when he said that everyone there should "encourage" those who weren't Christian in the area to move somewhere else.
My first reaction was anger and I told my wife, Susan, we were going to put our house up for sale the next day and move somewhere more tolerant. But the next morning, I decided that I would do something else first. I took my video camera down to the Veteran's Memorial in King's Public Park and started interviewing people....
Here are the direct links to a few places where I appear (there are more):
Makes one feel like crying. What a world. It's just shocking to the system to consider that I'm breathing the same air as these vile sex slavers and their depraved clients.
Most people think that slavery is a crime of the past. However, this notion couldn’t be any further from the tragic reality of a well organized criminal activity which victimized more than 30 millions women and children worldwide. As matter of fact, there are more people being enslaved today than at any other time in human history....
Sex slavery is not limited to brothels is Thailand, Cambodia, the Philippines or the Dominican Republic. In countries where prostitution is legal, like Germany, traffickers, pimps and dangerous organized crime organizations such as the Russian mafia or ethnic Albanians are controlling most sex workers, even the ones who claim to be “independent”. According to recent estimates, there are currently around 200,000 children between the age of 12 to 15 who are sold for sex by pimps/traffickers every year in the United States....
...the information super-highway has given criminal organizations the tool to turn sex trafficking into a multi-billions a year enterprise. It is more profitable than drug and weapon trafficking...
Often large criminal organizations work together to control the recruitment of the victims, the transit and the enslavement at the destination point. The Russian mafia and Albanian gangs have the upper hand in Europe, and often work in association with recruiters/pimps in the Middle-East - where the biggest hub/distribution point is Beirut, Lebanon - to provide Estonian, Ukrainian or Lithuanian women, which are in "high demand," for the rich "buyers" of the Gulf.
In Africa, the two biggest sources for human trafficking are currently Nigeria and Ghana. In a scheme that is more or less universal, women are recruited locally- often by other women- under the pretense of job opportunities aboard. But once they have reached their destination, either Italy, Greece, Belgium or Germany, their passports are taken away by pimps, they do not have legal immigration status, and they are forced to prostitute themselves-usually after being severely beaten and raped- to pay off the debt of their transit to Europe. According to a recent report from the British police, 75 percent of the sex trade in the UK is controlled by brutal Albanian gangs. In Germany, 75 percent of sex workers come from former Eastern block countries....
In the West, the Internet has become the number one platform for buying women and children for sex. Victims, from various countries of origin, are trafficked through pseudo-independent, but in reality pimp controlled escort services, chat rooms, and even "dating" web sites freely advertizing on the internet with ads such as "Meet Russian women online." In the United States, there are countless brothels disguised as “massage parlors”, and in the burgeoning strip club business industry, "exotic dancers" are in fact turning tricks in VIP rooms. In Texas, migrant women from central America- either from Guatemala or El Salvador- are lured into crossing the US border by Coyotes working with local pimps, Mexican gangs and Salvadorian/US gang MS13, and will likely end up being sex slaves in Cantinas or massage parlors....
An excellent movie on this subject is Liam Neeson's "Taken," which shows the depth of this depravity and how it all works, right under our noses in "civilized" societies. Neeson's Superman antics are obviously quite farfetched, but he does them so well! To all the real "superheroes" who are trying to stop this evil practice, thank you!
...according to some Christian and Muslim groups, doing yogic movements toward the sun amounts to some kind of heretical solar worship. (Yoga is an ancient Indian physical and meditative activity, derived from thousand-year-old Vedic traditions.)
"In Christianity, we consider sun as a creation by God and worshipping it is against our religion," said Anand Muttungal, spokesperson for Catholic Bishops Conference of Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh. He said he will approach Guinness to ask them not to consider the attempt as a record....
Well, isn't that just too bad! Complaining about people bowing to the sun is against my religion - please respect my religion! (At that article, someone comments: "I never before considered bowing to the Sun, but now that I know it offends Christians and Muslims I am going to start doing it.")
I personally am not offended by sun worship, but I am offended by religions derived from sun worship that fallaciously pretend to be divine revelation and that vulgarly worship a male god of a particular ethnicity, e.g., Christianity. So, perhaps I should tell Guinness that Christianity is against my religion and that they should ignore the complaints?
Seriously, when it's cold outside, I am so happy to stand in a sunbeam - there is little more benevolent than warm sunshine at that moment. For that reason alone, I would count myself among sunworshippers.
If it's good enough for my prophet George Carlin (pot be upon him), it's good enough for me:
"I've begun worshiping the sun for a number of reasons. First of all, unlike some other gods I could mention, I can see the sun. It's there for me every day. And the things it brings me are quite apparent all the time: heat, light, food, a lovely day. There's no mystery, no one asks for money, I don't have to dress up, and there's no boring pageantry. And, interestingly enough, I have found that the prayers I offer to the sun and the prayers I formerly offered to 'God' are all answered at about the same fifty percent rate."
For other thoughts on sun worship, I found this modern philosopher's ideas to be ancient yet intriguing. The pertinent part begins at 2:21, while at 19:12 he discusses other stars as sentient beings as well.
Since anti-woman sexism is an integral part of Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, the only way these women are going to succeed is if they stop following Ultra-Orthodox Judaism and stop producing children who do likewise. Otherwise, they're stuck with the Abrahamic misogyny. Fortunately, this group of fervent misogynists is tiny; unfortunately, many of them have beaucoup bucks, which means they can and do influence policies well beyond their demographics.
As a temp, I once worked briefly for a massive company called "Olympia and York," which was responsible for constructing many skyscrapers and other buildings in NYC and Toronto, among others. The owners of the company are Ultra-Orthodox Jews or Haredi who were extremely wealthy. I was the receptionist at their HQ in NYC for a few days. I had to wear not only a dress that was below my knees but also to make sure that my elbows were covered. Apparently, a woman's elbows are just so very sexy. I don't think they made me cover my hair, but I was just a goy, so they cut me some slack.
I also once worked as a receptionist for Sutton Place Synagogue in New York. The old, chain-smoking women there were horrendous and basically chased me out after a few hours - the same they had done with the previous receptionists. The rabbi's wife was very nice and couldn't understand why I was leaving. She asked me to stay, because I said, "Shalom, Sutton Place Synagogue" so well. :)
I had many experiences with Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jews in NYC and Los Angeles. These latter are especially xenophobic and consider non-Jews to be inferior.
The women sit in the front instead of the back as they are supposed to here. Some followers of ultra-Orthodox Judaism believe men and women should be separated in public, although it is illegal under Israeli law. Women who challenge segregation have been insulted and spat upon....
In certain neighborhoods, advertisements showing women have been vandalized. Women are encouraged to walk on the other side of the street from men, and recently, an 11-year-old schoolgirl complained on television of being harassed. Critics say some rabbis condone these activities....
To base one's worldview on genitalia is a mark of unconsciousness and unenlightenment. Is forcing women into such subservience and enslavement the only way these men can get mates?
What people are saying about Acharya S/D.M. Murdock
"Your scholarship is relentless! ...the research conducted by D.M. Murdock concerning the myth of Jesus Christ is certainly both valuable and worthy of consideration." —Dr. Kenneth L. Feder, Professor of Archaeology, Central Connecticut State University, Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience In Archaeology
"I find myself in full agreement with Acharya S/D.M. Murdock... I find it undeniable that...many, many of the epic heroes and ancient patriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament were personified stars, planets, and constellations..."—Dr. Robert M. Price, The Pre-Nicene New Testament
"I can recommend your work whole-heartedly!"—Dr. Robert Eisenman, James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code, RobertEisenman.com
"Well-referenced, with numerous quotations from renowned Egyptologists and classical scholars, Acharya's penetrating research clearly lays out the very ancient pre-Christian basis of modern Christianity. Those who espouse Christianity beware! After digesting the evidence, you will never again view your religion in the same light." —Dr. Robert M. Schoch, Professor of Natural Science College of General Studies at Boston University; Author, Pyramid Quest, Voyages of the Pyramid Builders and Voices of the Rocks
"Acharya S deserves to be recognized as a leading researcher and an expert in the field of comparative mythology, on a par with James Frazer or Robert Graves—indeed, superior to those forerunners in the frankness of her conclusions and the volume of her evidence." —Barbara Walker, The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets and Man Made God
"I've known people with triple Ph.D's who haven't come close to the scholarship in Who Was Jesus?" —Pastor David Bruce, M.Div, North Park Seminary, Chicago, HollywoodJesus.com
"Thirty years ago, when in divinity school, I might have had second thoughts about becoming an Episcopal priest if a book like D. M. Murdock's Who Was Jesus? had been available to me." —Bob Semes, Retired university professor of History and Religion, Founder and Executive Director of The Jefferson Center
"In addition to presenting in Suns of God the troubling history of religious wars in an easily followed narrative, Acharya goes a step further, explaining as only she can how a once-simplistic idea has been carried into our modern world with terrible and nearly unimaginable results." —Rev. Dr. W. Sumner Davis, Fellow, Royal Astronomical Society; Member, American Geophysical Union; Affiliate, New York Academy of Science
"Ms. Murdock is one of only a tiny number of scholars with the richly diverse academic background (and the necessary courage) to adequately address the question of whether Jesus Christ truly existed as a walking-talking figure in first-century Palestine." —David Mills, Atheist Universe
"Thank you, Acharya, for the important work you are doing. Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of the Christ just might be the best short introduction to Biblical scholarship yet." —David Bergland, 1984 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate, Libertarianism In One Lesson
"...I have found her scholarship, research, knowledge of the original languages, and creative linkages to be breathtaking and highly stimulating." —Rev. Dr. Jon Burnham, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Houston, TX
"Acharya S has done a superb job in bringing together the rich panoply of ancient world mythology and culture, and presenting it in a comprehensive and compelling fashion." —Earl Doherty, The Jesus Puzzle
"Acharya S is a shining light of truth in a sea of deceit."—Rob McConnell, X Zone Radio/TV, Ontario, Canada
"The Christ Conspiracy—very, very scholarly and wholly researched—is a book for today..." Rev. B. Strauss, ex-Catholic Priest, Chicago, IL
"Amidst the global chaos of George Bush's War on Terror, largely founded on religious intolerance and simplistic notions of good and evil, Acharya S is the voice of reason." —Joan D'Arc, Paranoia
"D.M. Murdock could well be the most brilliant, insightful and rigorous theologian writing today." —Robert Tulip
"Acharya S is the ranking religious philosopher of our era." —John K.
"Acharya S/Murdock deserves an award for her hard work and courage. She is the Galileo of our day!"—Charles Johnson
"Acharya S knows more about the ancient Mysteries than any living scholar." —Christopher Knowles
"Acharya S is an amazing researcher with a tremendous amount of energy and appetite for constant discovery of newer horizons. " —Dr. O.P. Sudrania
This Constitutional "wall of separation" was further solidified by a woman named Vashti McCollum, who sued her local school board over religious indoctrination and won, in a Supreme Court ruling in 1948:
Jessica may be in the minority in Cranston, but she's in good company as the latest in a long line of Rhode Island dissenters — beginning with the state's founder, Roger Williams.
My religion has no giant, anthropomorphized, male God in the sky, somewhere "out there" separate and apart from humanity who dictates our every waking moment.
My religion prohibits the mutilation of children's genitals of either gender, based on "religious" dictates.
Here's a new Church/State documentary by artist Scott Burdick that features me several times, along with some comments by others that will surely ruffle a few feathers. In the 
Despite the attempted divorcing of Surya Namaskar or "Sun Salutation" from religious connotation, it should be emphasized that this natural solar ritual is part of Hinduism and, according to prevailing political correctness, must therefore be respected as a religious rite. 
