Tag Archives: morality

by

Why Is Atheism Rising?

It’s not that people woke up one day, and decided that they didn’t need gods; it’s that the reasons for needing them are quietly vanishing.  The stories that once made sense of the world are no longer enough.  And when something stops making sense, people stop holding on to it, no matter how sacred it once was.

The shift is quiet, but steady.  It doesn’t show up in protests, or revolutions, it shows up in the absence of prayer, and fewer people attending religious services, in younger people checking a different box on the census.  It shows up in a growing number of people saying they just don’t believe anymore, and don’t really miss it.

There’s a simple reason that Atheism is rising.  It’s not that people are getting angrier, it’s because they’re getting more curious.  Questions that were once dangerous, are now just normal, and questions that once silenced rooms, now don’t feel complete.  In the past, the structure of religions wasn’t just spiritual, it was practical.  It shaped laws, families, schools, and even the idea of morality itself.  But that structure only works when it remains unchallenged.

The moment something is questioned, it becomes something else entirely.  The Internet did something that religion never could.  It connected people, not through a shared belief, but through a shared doubt.  For the first time, someone sitting alone in a room in a deeply religious town could read the thoughts of someone who had walked away from it all, and hadn’t collapsed into chaos.

That exposure broke the illusion that belief was the only option.  Religions tend to thrive in isolation.  When a group is all you’ve ever known, its truths seem absolute.  But when you start seeing how many groups exist, and how each one believes something different, something starts to crack.  If they can’t all be correct, then perhaps they are all wrong.

Globalization didn’t just move products.  It moved ideas.  It exposed contradictions, and it made it harder to keep belief systems contained.  A young person raised is a strict religious home can now access scientific explanations, secular philosophy, and opposing viewpoints with a few taps on a screen.  That kind of exposure changes the mind’s chemistry.

There’s also the fact that religious institutions have not done a good job of protecting their own image.   Scandals, abuse, cover-ups, political involvement – these things don’t just shake individual faith.  They erode trust in the entire idea of religious belief.  When the people preaching morality are caught in deeply immoral ways, it doesn’t just damage reputations, it makes people rethink everything.

But the rise of Atheism isn’t just about disappointment, it’s about development.  There’s a direct correlation between education levels and religious belief.  Studies have shown that the more years of schooling people have, the less likely they are to believe in supernatural claims.

by

Eight Ways To Be Wrong About Atheists

The quickest and surest way, is to not actually engage with Atheists.  Don’t talk to them, debate them, or ask them questions.  Don’t listen to, or accept, their answers and explanations.  Just keep spouting groundless religious claims that you inherited from someone else.  Be like this guy, who had

Eight Reasons Not To Be An Atheist

  1. An atheist assigns himself to life with merely finite purposes

His first claim is full of the presupposition of choice and rebellion.  If indeed, God does not exist, then finite purposes are all that there are.  His further claim that even Atheists feel that there is something bigger than them – something outside them – still doesn’t prove that IT is God.  A little concrete evidence of His existence might change that.

  1. The atheist must also suppress the demands of logic

Again, we see the presupposition from Something complex must have been designed, to, A design requires a designer, so, The designer must have been God.  None of these three claims are necessarily true, and do not necessarily follow one another.  A large mirror, dropped on a concrete floor, will produce an amazingly complex result, with no designer.  Apologists like this don’t even understand Logic, unless it works in their favor.

  1. Yet, ironically, the atheist has to believe in miracles without believing in God

Here, he trots out the old, tired, often-refuted Kalam Cosmological Argument, saying that everything that begins to exist must have a cause.  Since he doesn’t have enough imagination, and scientific understanding, he can’t (and doesn’t want to) think of any alternative, so he plugs in God as the only option.

Physicists have posited several theories for the existence of the Universe.  Constant energy infusion into a bubble of the Meta-verse may have caused it to shit spit out our local representation.  Since Time only came into existence with the coalescence of Matter, there was never a Time when the Universe did not exist.  Therefore, it is possible for the Universe to have a finite past – yet to have existed infinitely – no God required.

  1. An atheist must also suppress all notions of morality

Why??!  Just because he says so??!  Most Atheists make no claims about morality, because it is a term that has been co-opted by Christians.  Atheists have ethics and empathy.  The Christian God of the Bible – the archetype of their moral values – not only permitted, but encouraged, murder, rape, torture, forced marriage, genocide, racism and slavery.  Good Christians and their morals clog prisons, rehab centers and divorce courts.  I want nothing to do with Christian morals.

  1. In fact, the atheist must conclude that evil is an illusion

So, if Atheism is valid, there are no real evils, just violations of human customs or conventions. How hard would it be to think of murderers as merely having bad manners?

“Evil” is indeed, an illusion, one believed in by most Christians.  It does not exist as a distinct entity.  For any given situation, there are different possible series of actions.  Some will be more beneficial to an individual, and the Human race as a whole.  Others will reduce individual and group happiness and well-being.

Drinking battery acid – or Ivermectin – may not be “evil,” but it will not produce the most good.  Neither will murder.  It is far more than mere ‘bad manners.’  I know of no Atheist who would claim it was.  I am appalled that this Christian Apologist would do so.

  1. The atheist must also live with the arrogance of his position

His assertion that there is no God requires that he pretend to possess total knowledge.

That is why Apologists get so upset when Atheists insist that they simply don’t believe because they have not been presented with convincing evidence.  For the Christian, it’s like punching a fogbank, so they lie pretend that Atheists say things that most of us don’t.  For many Christians, their religion is their life.  Despite their protestations, they aren’t half as upset that we don’t believe in their God, as they are when they find that we don’t believe in them.

  1. The atheist must also deny the validity of historical proof

The extensive manuscript evidence of eyewitnesses to the resurrection is presented in an unbiased, authentic manner.

Yeah, right??!  Pull the other one.  Four Gospels that don’t agree with each other, and one author who wasn’t there, but who claims that 500 people saw the risen Christ – only – that’s all there is, one man’s claim.  There is no list of names, or where/how many places, this occurred.  There are not 500 sworn affidavits, just a vague assertion.  I couldn’t get someone convicted of double-parking with that quality of evidence.

  1. Finally, atheists must admit that humans are not importantly different from other animals

And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen, that desperate, ego-driven need to feel special.  Humans are like, and different from, other animals in a variety of ways, and to a range of degrees.  Science is finding that species like whales and dolphins and apes and chimpanzees are remarkably human-like in many ways.  I’d like to drop him in the middle of the Serengeti, near a pride of hungry lions, and let him explain to them, just how important he is.

The atheist’s problem with belief in God is not an absence of evidence but suppression of it.
Citation needed!  Many well-known Atheists were priests, preachers, seminarians, and evangelicals.  Reputable polls show that, on average, Atheists know more about the Bible and the Christian faith, than most Christians do.  Their ‘evidence’ is not being suppressed.  It is being dismissed as unproven, and unconvincing.

by

Malleable Morals

In the middle of a pile of feel-good, but unproven, religious claims, the amateur Christian Apologist suddenly – CLEARLY – wrote….

But we know genocide is evil. Since it IS morally wrong, we know there must be a standard beyond us which is the standard of goodness, righteousness, and justice.  That standard is God. And without God, you can’t say genocide is wrong because that’s just your opinion.

If genocide is evil, and morally wrong, why does the God of the Bible not only condone it, but urge and support it??! I’d ask the Amalekites, but…. you know.   😳

The Amalekites were burning their new born babies over statues as a sacrifice to their gods. They were raping and murdering people. That’s who they were. They were evil and wicked people.

 Is genocide evil and immoral, or not??! You posited a concrete, objective statement that it was, with God as the good, moral, righteous and just basis. Now you seem to be claiming that even though God caused and aided the genocide, the people who were wiped out deserved it.

Maybe they did, but you can’t have it both ways. Now your claims and morals, and the morals of your God, are suspect and subjective. Even your God’s little flood snit-fit to cover the fact that He had made a mistake, and was not in control, was the greatest example of genocide ever recorded…. or made up. The Egyptians and the Chinese don’t seem to have noticed it.   😯

One of my readers wondered why I seem to avoid addressing good Christian arguments, and only pick on the stupid ones.  Partly, it’s because of the entertainment value, but it’s mostly because there are no ‘good’ Christian arguments – only less stupid ones.  It’s all low-hanging fruit.

A young – but none too bright – Apologist has his own YouTube channel, where he posts videos refuting Atheists’ claims, although it often seems as if the whole point is to make Atheists look good.  He supported Ray Comfort’s Holy Banana theory, until an Atheist shot it down in flames.

He recently posted a video in which he, in all apparent seriousness, claimed that, Evolution must be false, because it’s racist.   Darwinism relies on “Survival of the Fittest,” and, if we evolved from African-Americans, how could there still be African-Americans??

If Americans came from Europeans, why are there still Europeans??!  If God created us from dust, why is there still dust??!  So few words – so many mistakes/lies.

Apologists don’t even like to use the word Evolution, lest it gain some validation.  They use the pejorative, Darwinism, dismissing it like crystals, or reiki, or horoscopes.  It does not ‘rely on’ Survival of the Fittest – which does not mean what this racist little fuck seems to think it does.  And, “Evolved from African-Americans”??!  He’s not even smart enough to deny that we evolved from monkeys.  😳

A 15-year-old, male Atheist, tired of listening to his Bible-thumper mother, conned her into calling in to The Atheist Experience podcast.  With absolutely no training in Theology, Philosophy, logic or debate, she faced a moderator who was.

She tried to present a variety of silly, unprovable, kindergarten-level claims, which he quickly and easily refuted.  Her defense then was that he had spoken sternly to her and embarrassed her in front of her son.  The poor dear!  For many of them, that’s what it comes down to.  Some of them need to be spoken to, sternly.  👿

by

Flash Fiction #254

PHOTO PROMPT © David Stewart

DREAMS UP IN SMOKE

Cheryl offered to help him with his writing.  A couple who worked at the newspaper dropped by each Friday, and they often discussed the craft.  “Join us.”

The husband said the first thing they did, was smoke dope.  “It frees the creativity.”  He silently demurred, not for moral or legal reasons, but from skepticism.  He’d be the abstaining benchmark.  “I’ll get a beer and catch up.”

A Cheech and Chong blunt got passed around…. around…. and around.  Potatoes, motorcycles, redhead in sales, socks with sandals…. Bright topics bubbled into the conversation – and were immediately forgotten.

There was no creativity here.

***

Go to Rochelle’s Addicted to Purple site and use her Wednesday photo as a prompt to write a complete 100 word story.

by

One Thing At A Time

Boxer

Battered, bruised and bleeding, the Christian Apologist scuttles forward. Desperate to level the debate playing field, and to achieve some validation, relevance and equivalency for his arguments, he claims, ‘Atheism Is A Religion.’

No, it’s not! We refuted that.

Well then, ‘Atheism Is A World-View.’

No it’s not! How dumb do you come??! The only reason that any two Atheists share a world-view, is that there are more Atheists than there are basic world-views.

Waaah! Atheists claim to be intellectual and logical, but they’re using emotion-based ridicule against Christians. (That emotion-based belief stuff should be reserved for the Christians.)

If you’d accept fact-based evidence, instead of dismissing it out of hand, we wouldn’t have to. We’re merely fighting fire with fire – or in this case, mud-slinging and name-calling. We know that you’re busy, campaigning for Trump. Atheism is only the lack of belief in God, or gods.

Frantic to have ANY handle to hang an argument on, the Apologist grasps at the word, ‘only.’ “Atheism must be more than ONLY!   Atheists believe in Science. Atheists accept the Theory of Evolution. Atheists claim that they have morals, and that they are ‘Good Without God.’ It must, somehow, be more than only.”

Hold on, cowboy. Climb down off your hobby-horse. One thing at a time!
What do you do for a living? Truck-driver? Are you only a truck-driver??! For example, you’re not a truck-driver and a guitar player – or a Jeopardy! fan? Do you have to be a Christian to be a trucker? Are all truckers Christians? Do all truckers hate faggots? Do all truckers feel that a wall should be built, to keep illegal aliens out? Are only truckers moral?

You can be Only about one issue, but still be very involved in many others, some of which are only vaguely connected to the one under consideration. Some Atheists believe in evolution. Some don’t. Some Christians believe in evolution. Some don’t. Some Atheists trust science. Some don’t. Some Christians trust science. Some don’t. Many Atheists are highly moral. A disappointing number of Christians aren’t.

Prove that Atheism is true.

There is so much semantic, social, emotional and Theistic baggage attached to that challenge, that I’m surprised the writer didn’t throw his back out, just wrestling it onto the screen. In attempting to prove equivalence, this Christian apparently thinks that Atheism has similar many and magnificent claims and beliefs that his religion does.

Compared to say, Christianity, the footprint of Atheism is small. It is only the lack of belief in the existence of God. On a personal basis, my Atheism is the rejection of all your bullshit claims. What do I believe? I believe that you are deluded and desperate. The mere fact that I write that, and make that statement, makes my Atheism true.

Many Apologists get so intense at winning the argument – at trying to prove Atheists wrong – that they forget what the original point of discussion was. DOES GOD EXIST, OR NOT??! Can you prove it? Even if, tomorrow, we found that everything that we think we know about The Big Bang and Evolution is wrong, (And, with the mountain of scientific results we have, that is vanishingly unlikely.) it still doesn’t justify a claim that God did it. One thing at a time.

by

Smitty’s Loose Change #9

Chalice

Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.

Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.

In the past we had chalices of wood and priests of gold.

Now we have chalices of gold, and priests of wood.

It is far better to have a religion without a church, than a church without a religion.

When religion is used to pander to political whims, it must forego the high moral ground, and become debased by worldly political demands.  The thrust should not be, but often is, directed at the creation of new political institutions and establishing political arrangements.

***

I decided to reward myself with a cup of coffee after a long, hard week.
Then I realized that it’s Tuesday.  Morning!

***

I’ve found a couple of inventive ways to irritate telemarketers, who call at inopportune times (are there ever any opportune times?)  I’ve placed the phone on my stomach, while reclining in my easy chair, after a platter of nachos.  I’ve laid it, face-up, beside a cat who was loudly demanding to be fed.

The son and grandson, third and fourth generations of this weirdly delightful (and delightfully weird) family, have outpaced even me.  One day, the son was in the computer room after coming home from work.  He was standing beside the scanner/printer/fax machine, when the phone rang.  When it rings, the fax machine wakes up. Is it for me?

He said ‘Hello’ into the phone, and got that second of dead air, then it opened to a boiler-room of 50 Pakis babbling in the background.  He immediately jabbed the ‘Send Fax’ button.  SCREEEE-AWWW, SCREECH-SCREECH.  If the fax noise hadn’t drowned it out, he might have learned what the Urdu word for ‘Fuck’ was.

Even more technological, the grandson’s smart-phone shows who’s calling.  When he pulls it from his pocket and looks at the screen, it shows ‘Duct-Cleaner,’ so he answers, “Rogers’ Duct-Cleaning Services, how may we help you?”  “Uhhh….never mind.”

***

I recently found a small advertising flyer, hand-delivered to my mailbox.  It was from a new real-estate company, offering 1% commission sales.  “And you don’t pay until you sell.”  All I could think was, “Margaret, I’ve got a great idea.  Let’s not sell the house….but we’ll give these nice people several thousand dollars, just because they put a postcard in our mailbox.”

***

Clarity

Forest fire update:  Parry Sound 33 inches closer to Highway 69

I wasn’t sure just how a forest fire could move an entire small city almost a meter (yard), so I succumbed to the click bait.  It seems that, a forest fire, identified as “Parry Sound, number 33,” slowly burns (inches) closer to Highway 69.  One little # number sign, or even a comma, would have made that much clearer.

Punctuation

***

That’s about all the stuff that runs screaming through my head, that the court order allows me to tell you at this time.  Arncha glad?   😆

 

by

Religious Freedom To Be Paranoid

Bible

Christianity is again under attack.  So says a newspaper article that’s as predictable as tomorrow’s sunrise.  The headline is actually ‘Freedom of religion disappearing in Canada,’ but Christianity is the only religion mentioned.

The writer gives two examples of loss of (Christian) religious freedom which I can refute quickly and easily.
The man is a paranoid, fucking moron.

What??!  You were expecting something deeper, and more considered?  Alright!

He whines about the Federal Liberal government refusing to give grant money, for the hiring of summer students, to any organization which will not guarantee support for birth control or abortion.   He, and many others, feels that this is loss of religious freedom.

Not so!  Any such church, or Christian organization, is still free to hold and teach any and all moral positions.  The Federal Government is just telling them that they cannot finance proselytizing their restrictive, judgemental views with MY tax money.  He complains that the churches can’t get back “their money,” but all churches are tax-exempt.

Locally, the Federal Government has tried and failed four times in the last 15 years, to strip a successful businessman of his citizenship, and deport him.  He came to Canada in 1948, and became a real estate developer.  He employed over a hundred people, and he and his wife were active in social causes, donating over $2 million to various worthy causes.

He was a 17-year-old ethnic German, living with his family in the Ukraine, when the Nazi death-squads arrived.  When they found that he could speak both German and Russian, they kidnapped him and threatened him and his family with torture and death if he didn’t translate for them, so that they could find the Jews and Gypsies.  Under U.N. regulations, this made him a ‘child soldier,’ not subject to prosecution.

After 50 years of raising three successful children, and giving so much to the country, the Canadian Jewish Congress discovered that he’d ‘been part’ of this hated death squad, and began fomenting for his exile.

It is not illegal, under Canadian law, to have been part, but it is illegal to have lied to immigration officers when he attempted to enter the country.  He says that, when he applied in 1948, Immigration saw him as a young Ukrainian, and only asked him, “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?”

Ever anxious to foster the myth of an infallible bureaucracy, the tribunal decided that, “On the basis of probabilities,” he must have lied to officials.

Skip happily with me now, out to British Columbia, to the Trinity Law School, a church-run Christian College.  They require all their students to sign a Code of Conduct.  While enrolled at the College, students may not support abortion, birth-control, or same-sex marriage.  In fact, no sex of any kind, except with someone you’re married to.

Law Societies across Canada have declared that they will not regard a certificate from this school as valid.  The College, and writers like this article’s, are howling that this is an infringement of their religious freedom.  Again, not so!

They are still free to teach and instill this code of conduct, just as the Law Societies are free to decline to take the school and its graduates seriously.  In an area of business and society where neutrality and equality are valued, “On the basis of probabilities,” it is assumed that students exposed to this constant propaganda will have, at least an unconscious bias, detrimental to the even-handed practice of law.

Freedom of religion does not include the freedom to impose ‘yours’ upon anyone else, no matter how wonderful and ‘divinely inspired’ you feel it is.  That’s the quota of ‘Rants and Rambles’ that I’m free to publish today.  I hope to see you again soon, for something sillier.

by

I Confess

confession-box

I went to confession after a long break I was feeling depressed, and life wasn’t going so well, when walking down the street I passed the church. It had been many years since I went to church, and just as long since I last went to the confessional. Perhaps, I thought, getting right with God would help fix my life.

I went into the church, and the dim light and smell of incense brought it all back. I headed for the confession booth and went straight in. Wow, things had changed in all those years.

There was a comfy chair, a small screen TV, the Wi-Fi password. Then I opened the cupboard and inside was a bottle of fine malt scotch, and some cigars! Suddenly the door opened and the priest appeared, and he said sharply “Get out, you’re on my side!”

Or maybe that guy is confessing because….

A thief in Paris planned to steal some paintings from the Louvre. After careful planning, he got past security, stole the paintings, and made it safely to his van. However, he was captured only two blocks away when his van ran out of gas.

When asked how he could mastermind such a crime and then make such an obvious error, he replied: “Monsieur, that is the reason I stole the paintings. I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh.”

***

THE LAST SUPPER

And it came to pass that they were having a glass or two of vino. Jesus looked but only saw 11 disciples. Yet in the place of Judas was a six pack of Guinness.
“What is that?”
“That´s Judas´ carry out” replied James.
“Will he be along later?”
“I doubt it,” said Thomas.
“What about some music? Peter you are the Rock star. Play some heavy metal.”
And Lo, Peter did play some Nine Inch Nails.
“Why are you dressed in all of those dark clothes?” asked Jesus.
“I thought it was a Black Sabbath,” said Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.
It was a great night, though later on Peter let himself down a bit; you should never wait up for the cock.
And in the morning, Jesus Swept.

***

Texas
The Sheriff pulled up next to the guy unloading garbage out of his pick-up into the ditch. The Sheriff asked, “Why are you dumping garbage in the ditch? Don’t you see that sign right over your head.”

“Yep,” he replied. …. “That’s why I’m dumpin’ it here…
’cause it says: …. ‘Fine For Dumping Garbage.’ “

***

Ole was talking with his brother Sven, who lived next door, when Sven said, “Ya know Ole, you and Lena should really get some new curtains.” “Vy’s dat?” Ole asked. “Vel last night I saw you and Lena, vel you know…” Ole thought for awhile, then said, “Ha-ha Sven, da yokes on you! I vasn’t even home last night!”

***

On a recent lunch hour, I decided to take a walk down by the harbor. A big wave washed a lawyer off the dock, and he was drowning. Now I was stuck with a moral dilemma. Do I just ignore it, and continue with my lunch – or stay here and watch?

***

 

by

A To Z Challenge – T – Redux

april-challenge

When I published my T For Terrific Challenge post,  I made it an interactive one, promising to select one entry from those who gave me a T-word and a prompt, and write a post about it.  Susan Leighton over at Woman On The Ledge was the only one who actually did that, so she wins(?) by default.

Click on the link to her site and ask her why she would do such a thing. I guess I have to go through with this.  Since she’s a Woman On The Ledge, if I reneged, she might jump.

She submitted the word ‘tacky.’ Tacky??! I could write about tacky all day!  I have lots of inspiration.  I could go on at great length about the Kardashians or Donald Trump!  Why not?? They do!

Then she slipped the fine print to me. It had to be about cheesy B-grade movies of the 80s.  Oh, what an embarrassment of riches!  I wanted to do a piece about Clint Eastwood.  From Rowdy Yates on TV’s Rawhide, to talking to an empty chair, Clint has been quite a character over the years, both onscreen, and off.

clint-eastwood

I had hoped to write about his spaghetti westerns, but those were in the 60s and 70s.  I’ll have to go with his Dirt Harry series to get the correct decade.  It doesn’t matter.  They’re indistinguishable.  Like the remaking of the Japanese ‘Seven Samurai’ into the American western The Magnificent Seven, they are all morality plays.

dirty-harry

Everything is black and white. The Good Guys are always good. The Bad Guys are evil, and Right always prevails.  The only difference is that Clint’s character ‘Makes America Great Again’ through the application of justice with a Colt .44 Magnum handgun, instead of a .45 caliber Peacemaker.

The overall theme is to be respected, but the presentation means that each movie contains enough cheese to make me a big plate of nachos. I once watched a network broadcast of, “I know what you’re thinking. Did he fire six shots – or only five?” where the network censors edited out two gunshots to reduce the total violence, rendering the line ridiculous.

The 80s was also the decade when Clint did a couple of Any Which Way But…. movies, where he played second banana to an ill-mannered, incoherent, bright orange orangutan.  This should have been good training for dealing with the recently-crowned inaugurated, Emperor President Donald Trump.

Well, there you have it, ladies and gentlemen, another composition proving that I have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about, and couldn’t generate interest with Doctor Frankenstein’s lightning-rod apparatus. Don’t blame me!  It’s not my fault!  susan Susan made me do it!  😳

by

Enforced Morality

Badge

Almost a month after I posted my What A Bunch Of Boobs piece, an op-ed letter from a man revealed that the local male constable and the Police Chief, still had not issued an apology to the three topless female bicycle riders. Shortly after, the following letter appeared in the paper.

It’s time to move on

Re; Apology still required – Aug 18

I could not get over Ron Dettweiler’s request for an apology from the officer and chief of police regarding the topless women on bicycles.

It’s over – he has to let it go. Our police are up to their necks with calls on a day-today basis. It’s stressful and they are on a budget too. He can wait and wait, but in my opinion, he will never get an apology in print or otherwise.

You have to look at this issue from other people’s perspective, including those of the police. There are two sides to a coin.

We have to move forward and act like proper ladies and gentlemen in our daily lives, private and public.

Jason Koeppl

***

Hhmmmmmng… That’s the sound of me, biting my tongue. Screw it! I lost the battle.

***

Morality and the law

Re; It’s time to move on – Aug. 26

Jason Koeppl doesn’t seem to understand the difference between enforcing morals, and enforcing the law.

He says that police are busy on a day-to-day basis, and have better things to do than apologise. I agree. They have more important, legal, Police duties to perform than stopping and harassing three young topless female bike riders, who were breaking no law. This is not within their field of business. They could be gentlemen and offer regrets for their mistaken over-reaction.  Public relations and apologies are part of the Chief’s job description.

If Koeppl and/or his priest want to try to enforce morals, I’d like to bicycle down topless to watch, and point and laugh.

Crusty Curmudgeon
The Archon

***

The newspaper opted not to print ‘and/or his priest’, as well as ‘and point and laugh’, probably viewing them as just a bit too acerbic. Can’t be insulting ‘Good Christians’, even when they’re wrong.

I showed my letter to the wife, and we had a lively discussion, every second line of which was, “Yes dear.” Since she may not be the only one who ‘doesn’t get’ what seems obvious to me, it went this way.

“They’re just sluts.”
Yes dear, but that’s not the business of the police.
“They shouldn’t be doing that.”
Yes dear, but the police are busy chasing speeders and donut shop bandits. They don’t have the time or budget to enforce morals.
“Well somebody should force them to put clothes on.”
Yes dear, but they’re not breaking any law, so the police should stay out of it.
“The law should be changed back! I’m going to write my local politician.”
Yes dear, and if and when that happens, the already busy police will have one more non-productive thing to do.
“Somebody should tell them that we aren’t going to stand for this type of behavior.”
Yes dear, grab a priest and head for Speakers’ Corner.
“We don’t need a priest. We just need a bunch of irate, vocal wives.”
Yes dear, I know the power of an irate, vocal wife. 😛

Any thoughts about topless women in public, or whether the police should, or should not, get involved?