Banner Rotate



Logo by Julian Spanos

Antitheistic. Long. Perplexing. Offensive. Whatever.

Warning: This blog does not cater to your whims. If you are offended, then I am not obliged to care. It ain't personal until otherwise stated.

Random Quotes

Friday, February 10, 2006

Separating the nuggets from the diarrhoea!

My recent plethora of outbursts against the Islamic-right certainly had some theological minds boggling on my case. Some thinkers attempted to ponder the depths of my psychosis; meanwhile, others pondered the thought of which level of hell I’ll be going to, and how quickly I could be united with my eternal outcome, which would in their beliefs, be nothing short of hell. Of course, I too have had some musings of my own in relation to the matter, but before I could present those, I had to ask some of these book thumpers about my real standing. Has there been a point where I have actually defiled the nurturing virtues of any of these 'holy' books? Have I? I don't think so. Hell, I don’t even discourage people from embracing a new faith, regardless of its implications; of course, my opinions are another matter, but that’s a freedom that I must exploit, and the subtle manipulation is undeniable--life itself is a manipulation. However, something must be seriously wrong with this picture; perhaps everyone‘s mind track is too contrived? I’d agree!

Particularly, in the recent past, I had some interaction with an old friend of mine; this guy isn’t perfect, but his intense distinction is forged through a venue of quirks and of course, his unparalleled prowess to annoy the fuckin’ hell outta’ me to the point that I could spit blood clots! Yes siree! This person could push my buttons; he could push buttons that I never imagined existed on me. Now, my general stance and anti-religious outbursts had an impact on this dude, and he was hurt by my ‘generalisation’ of Islam. Yeah, well, buddy; it is a general monolith, y’know? They do generally behave alike, and that is what the religion does to them: it unifies them into one--gives them a group identity. However, I can accept the argument that such a point of view is only relevant to a basic perspective, and does not hold much accuracy when scrutiny comes into play--it‘s of little value when an advanced and in depth analysis is required. Fine, I accept! I over generalise! Therefore, I dedicate this column to rectifying that little mire, and this is the only time that I’ll consciously rectify something! So, fuck anyone who might be laughing and taking this down!

I heard what the dude had to say; I even heard what many of his sources and supporting comrades had to say about their ‘beliefs’. Now, I wasn’t unfair on ‘em! I took everything with a pinch of salt, and considered their stance on post-modern humanism, etc. I was pleasantly reassured that these guys are not nearly the same crap that I am used to seeing and despising; they couldn’t care much for the Mohammed cartoon for one fact. They were repulsed by the caricature, but that was about it; they didn’t condone any kind of physical reaction and were content just calling it a ‘childish act’. According to these folk, there is no such banter in the Koran that forbids doodling any of the ‘holy prophets.’

“Well, what do ya’ know? They’re normal, progressive people after all!” -- Kade’s pleasant surprise.

Oh, no, but I wasn’t going to sell out so quickly! See, I had these people defend their claims, and this is where the true dichotomy arose once again. Oddly enough, the principles that drove their points of view, were not Islamic, but in fact, ‘Koranic.’ “Oh, Kade! You dumb, dyslexic fucker! They’re the same thing!” some of you might be retorting just about now, but I disagree. I was effectively convinced by the front shown by these progressive Koran readers that many of their beliefs actually contradict the Sharia school-of-thought, which is pivotal in the Islamic world, more so than the book. In fact, their views were so sound because they only take what’s in the Koran, and then build up on it, which actually pits them against many of the archaic bullshit that has been created through this shit-ass doctrine that goes by the title of ‘Sharia.’

“Give us our dues, man! We’re good progressive folk! Praise our creed!” -- Argue the imaginary caricatures of these so-called progressives inside the depressed recesses of my mind.

Unfortunately, I am not going to praise the creed that everyone thinks I am about to; fuck no! The creed still remains the concoction of what the majority of the fuck buckets project it as, and it shall remain that way until that majority erode into a feeble minority. I effectively declare a division in my points of view, because I don’t view these two groups as the same. I continue to righteously despise the first group, which is a mix of extremes and moderates, who’re basically whoring to the same bill of humanistic oppression; on the other hand, the second group I respect as progressive thinkers who actually keep the true essence of religion their top priority: The virtues. “What the fuck, man! Kade, you stupid dolt! What are you trying to get away with now?” you ask, and I’ll tell you. I still hold the same view about the general, stagnant, third world Islam, as I do about most third world beliefs. On the other hand, the progressives who claim to be of the same religion, but can only and solely use their holy book as their defence, I view as tolerable ‘Koraniks!’ Yeah, cool title eh? It’s pronounced “Choranics!” I think it’s got a nice ring to it, but I digress. Let’s get back on topic here, shall we? Progressive thought is good, and so I will honour those that actually have progressive fruits to offer, because it’s really not that hard and can be pretty darn obvious. The Koraniks are a cool bunch; their Islamic siblings on the other hand, can munch on the big one, that is, if they’re not already doing so by proxy of their unrivalled stupidity and linear-mindedness.

Note: Yes, I have separated the cream from the milk, or in sad and mean spirit, the turd from the diarrhoea. Yes, yes, I know! It’s not nice! And the title was just a cheap dig! Don’t take it seriously.

In closing, I’ll also add that I know I made a folly by stating that holy books should be burned, because classic literature should be treated as classic! I apologise! I guess these books aren’t half-bad, and in the view of a rightful, thoughtful, and critical mind, they could certainly bear positive fruit. Therefore, what we should be burning, are dumb-ass doctrines and bills that are forged by malicious and/or otherwise pathetic interpretations of that same text; no one should determine how a piece of literary thought should mean to you, other than you, yourself. Burn the fucking bills of oppression, and for once, leave the books alone for each reader to analyse; let them actually interact with the literature and find their spiritual calling through it, rather than impose bills on them that’ll determine how and how not to perceive. These people who impose bills and conventional religious dogmas are nothing more than rapists of the perception, THE SORDID PERCEPTION FUCKERS! Follow the way of the progressives, and you might not even be placed against your book of faith; and what do you know, perhaps you might even get along with an otherwise incompatible world of differences by overcoming those differences through civil acknowledgement.

“These perception fuckers are the folly of it all! Who gave them the right to determine the essence of the literature, and then impose it on others? And then that in turn gives a bad rep to the books when it comes to the eyes of us detached agnostics! We just see the general idiots make global chaos and further pronounce their theological and philosophical myopia! Stupid fucks!” -- Kade’s current train of thought.

“Oh Kade, you’re getting philosophical again. It is nice to see you belch out less contempt, and actually expel something positive, for once!” -- Sincere critics.

“I still think you should fuck off, so… FUCK OFF!” -- Kade’s response.

Stay cool, fuckers!

Cheers,
Kade

No comments: