A humanist, a pacifist, I love my fellow man.
I wrestle with the gods that blight the Earth.
We humanists don't demonise, don't hatch a deadly plan
We think that even christians have their worth.
A wiccan god, a christian god, a hindu deity
Can be taken as excuse to fight and kill.
No humanist, no gentle man, will try to curb the free.
Religion always seems to lead to ill.
The Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran too
Are arenas where the gods of man make sport,
There, evil men all use their gods to tell them what to do.
When the real truth is "do just what you ought."
Don't treat your fellow mortals as a tool to laud your god.
All-potent beings would not need your praise.
If he knows your thoughts and sees your deeds, I think it rather odd
That he doesn't want to help to mend your ways.
So in Macbeth the witches aren't the evil you pretend
They just express the way the future looks.
It's goodly men, who plot and scheme, to do away a friend
Not women acting as unlikely cooks.
Don't look outside to deities; you think, you have free-will.
You have to judge your actions on your own.
You teach your children what is right, so they know good from ill
And with luck you won't have reason to atone.
Author notes
I can't let anyone get away with equating Christianity with good
At the time of Shakespeare across Europe "Christians" were busy burning each other and disembowelling non-believers to help them see the light.
It is just as valid to read a lot of Shakespeare as pointing out the evil deeds of the establishment.
A contest judge would like me to put Transatlanticism here, so I shall.
A contest entry
- The WRESTLE with GOOD and EVIL #91 Winklings and all friends by Lyndon.
3900 points, ended June 27, 2008, 10 entries
Silver trophy winner
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest - Something Different! by Trent plus pen.
800 points, ended August 19, 2008, 50 entries
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest - Want some points? Philosophy, God, whatever you want... by magneticblue.
1400 points, ended July 24, 2008, 25 entries
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest - CONTAINS RELIGION [Caution: May pollute your mind] by Southern Twilight.
800 points, ended October 27, 2008, 31 entries
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest
Please tell me what you think
Comments
1 - 48 of 48
-
All the talk, which you told me you didn't do-
About what one can know about transcendant and supernatural things...
like spelling!
I'll just metion that you mispelled "no" in the knext to last line...
I think there is a tremendous amount of sloppy thinking about the most important fundemental questions of existence:
Is there a creator?
Is he still there?
Is he interested in each of us personally?
How does one know?
To say God exists or to say he doesn't are both semantically equal statements of faith
Study is required. Objectivity is required. Humility is required. Both parties must be aware of their predjudices, circular logic, confirmational bias, loaded language, self-deceptions. But for each of us- we are stopping short if we don't study both sides.
So mr cricket
Do my thoughts have any worth? any good?
-
-
I don't do spiritual usually, I was provoked
Actually the two statements are not equal unless you wish to also say the same for Father Christmas the Tooth Fairy or the Great Prophet Zarquat. However I have no problem with people who choose to believe, the poem came about through the statement of a believer who chose to equate "Christian" with "good" which was a statement I have a huge problem with, implying as it does that two thirds of the population of the planet cannot be good. So I hit back
And yes study is always good, and the King James Bible is always worth reading for its poetry
-
-
You say, "We humanists don't demonise" and follow a little later with, "Religion always seems to lead to ill" which certainly looks like a blanket generalization fallacy and demonization to me.
"All-potent beings would not need your praise."
You know this how? Did you ask one? Ha ha ha. You don't believe in them but you feel qualified to speak for them. That's a pretty good trick.
"If he knows your thoughts and sees your deeds, I think it rather odd
That he doesn't want to help to mend your ways."
I seem to remember that there are thousands of references in the Bible of God wanting people to shape up.
You materialists are just as religious as everyone else, with your "belief" in knowledge being tantamount to worship. You "believe" you know what an "all-potent" being would think... though there is no logical reason why you should. You think you do less demonizing, yet your own words betray you. I think you have made the age old mistake of blaming religion for what people do. Should I assume all materialists are like you? Ha ha ha. Truth is that the vast majority of religious people are great people, as are the vast majority of materialists. It is the ones who feel superior to everyone else that muck up the works, regardless of belief system or philosophy, for it justifies their selfishness.
Nice rhyming.
In case you are wondering, I am not a Christian, I am an extreme skeptic.
-
-
I have always been extremely sceptical of your scepticism
-
-
Don't give me that sissy English spelling. It is skepticism.
-
-
Just because a few silly Americans decided to revise the spelling of English in the 1890s (then gave up as the job was impossible) doesn't mean you have to go along with them!
We got scepticism from them there Romans, they pinched it from the Greeks and changed the K.
-
-
...from Greek skeptikos thoughtful, from skeptesthai to look, consider...
Greek philosopher Pyrrho (c. 360-c.270 BCE) is generally considered the first philosophical skeptic in western philosophy. Little is known of Pyrrho or his followers, or of the next big names in the history of skepticism, Arcesilaus (ca. 316-241 BCE) and Carneades (214-270 BCE), each of whom headed the Academy founded by Plato.
Just because the Romans sissified it and you English love sissified versions of things does not make it authentic. The authentic spelling was in the Greek, who had skeptics centuries before the Romans did. Don't go trying to split hairs with someone who knows more than you do.
Just for good measure, materialism, as you profess to be a humanist, is considered philosophical dogma, which makes you on a par with the religious people as far as we skeptics are concerned. -
-
But the English use does not come from this route.
it derives from the Latin scepticus meaning thoughtful not from the Greek word Skeptikos with the same meaning or skeptesthai meaning to consider.
The philosophical use derives from the English word. Hence the US usage of a K is a modern invention. And nothing to do with the Greek at all.
-
-
Quit your phony nit-picking as the Latin came from the Greek. Look at the damn word, it is obvious the Romans simply spelled the Greek word differently. Since it is in the dictionary I use as skepticism, then I am a skeptic. If you have little prissy sceptics running around England, that is your problem.
-
-
We got it from the Latin, and you complain at them changing it, you got it from us and you changed it. Two wrongs don't make a right, the Greeks did not use a K they used Kappa, the translation of that to K is approximate.
-
-
But we changed it BACK. Where it was supposed to be. It is not two wrongs, it is a wrong and an unwrong.
-
-
It was never a K it was Kappa, if you want that change you have to make the others too.
-
-
I have to do no such thing. Dictionary sides with me. That is more authority than you have.
-
-
No it doesn't yo are using an American dictionary, go to the real source not some colonial knock-off
OED is the only dictionary worth quoting. -
-
I am sure that most men in England and the flamingly gay and transexuals here use the OED. But, since you lost two wars to us, it is our language until you can come win it back.
-
-
We've fought you three times and are winning 2-1
-
-
Your history books are screwed up, too!
YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA October 19, 1781 - In a stunning reversal of fortune that may signal the end of fighting in the American colonies, Charles Lord Cornwallis today signed orders surrendering his British Army to a combined French and American force outside the Virginia tobacco port of Yorktown.
The Battle of New Orleans took place on January 8, 1815, and was the final major battle of the War of 1812.[1] American forces, with General Andrew Jackson in command, defeated an invading British Army intent on seizing New Orleans and America's vast western lands.
In the Battle of Baltimore, one of the turning points in the War of 1812, American forces warded off a British sea invasion of the busy port city of Baltimore, Maryland.
You Lost. Face it.
-
-
The first Colonial Rebellion was in fact a war between Britain and France. France won.
In another context it was a British victory, because and English general commanding ethnic British troops defeated the German mercenaries fighting for a German king.
I only mention this to prove one point - one can talk a lot of crap about history and still be "right".
Now will you both just troll over to a neutral corner.
-
-
The US is not under the Queen's rule, therefore, you lost, we won. End of story. Ha ha ha. We now own the language, as the world learns English to speak to Americans, not the Brits.
Context, context, context. Right is a matter of context. Especially when it comes to history. You are using Equivocation! You say France won. Then you say it was a victory for the British. But, they do not mean the same thing and cannot be taken in the same context. The "victory" was a battle. The French "won" the war. Wars trump battles, so the more correct answer is France won. "Won" and "victory", as you used them, do not mean the same thing, as your argument implies.
There are no neutral corners, they are all mine! -
-
"Right is a matter of context. Especially when it comes to history. You are using Equivocation!"
Precisely. The device fitted exactly what I was saying. Thank you for proving my points. -
you'll all be speaking Spanish within a generation or two so we can have it back
Until then we'll keep speaking it and leave you to grunt in Mainiacese -
-
"you'll all be speaking Spanish within a generation"
I blocked you-know-who for saying that, and for saying that Europe would be over-run by arabic! -
You can't even spell Maineiac! The only reason you aren't all speaking German is because of us. Ha ha ha. How you talk mighty from a position of weakness. England will be a Muslim country within a decade, so pick your poison. I happen to like Latino women.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
That's a very thoughtful piece an well said. I noticed in the fifth stanza third line the word goodly and wonder if you meant "godly". Hapy trails and good luck in the contest
-
"We think that even christians have their worth."
Who does the 'we' refer to here, atheists is it? So you believe in no God, yet have no problem in catagorising and stereotyping 'christians' into such a phrasing as this, ey? interesting, interesting indeed.
Although I disagreed with much of what this said, nevertheless, it made for an interesting read, and, aside from the quote which I singled out, I was impressed to find no other derogatory insinuations used; which is often the downfall of many poems like this one.
Nice job, and best of luck in the contest
-
impressive
nicely done, you speak it innocently and kindly, using reason instead of blind hatred, and you include visions of truth, such as being humanist, which is all very true. It was well written, and I enjoyed reading it, thanks for entering
Good luck in the contest.
-
-i think you should censor the word/name g*d(s)
-"Religion always seems to lead to ill." YES YES YES YES YES SO TRUE
-the rhymes are amazing
-i love it
-i hope you win the contest (contains religion caution may pollute your mind)
-everything is so true
-
I enjoyed reading your poem it leaves many to wonder. I myself have my own beliefs and cannot be swayed by any words. But I find that it is better for me to keep them inside for one will and should believe as he wishes. I have always been appalled with violence in the name of GOD no matter which you seek. Thank you for sharing this got us thinking. Boog
-
yes, yes, yes ... the world has become a blood field of murder, torture and brutality because of one, and only one religion ... yet there is a second one even worse, but the first one kept it down to get its lions share of what this beautiful world used to have and both of these bow down to the one old man in the sky with the long beard and the great whacking cane with a big feux diamond at the top ... the one this killer likes to use to shove his muck down our throats ... yet, there are a few who know him as something else, and these are his only true lovers, for these are the ones who are tender, and just and strong ... a trinity most difficult and not for cowards, but, nontheless well loved by a few
oh, also, your poem is very well done
-
I greatly appreciate your detailed explanation of what you believe and why, it makes the point of your piece much clearer and is exactly what I was looking for in this contest. I, myself, am a christian, but I agree that the majority of christians do not act in a way that portrays the love of an omnipotent God. You expressed your views intelligently and in a way that is not offensive. Thank you for entering and good luck.
-
You've had my bunnies for this, bro. Congratulations on the bit of silverware!
-
crystaldust
Congratulations on taking the silver and amen to your humanist views. Great stuff.
Joy -
-
Thank-you
-
-
I've read poems of this type several times in the past and found it somewhat refreshing that you pursued and arranged your thoughts a little differently from the others. I will say, however, that I found the poem a little choppy in spots. Other than that it was an interesting read.
Grizzled -
RELIGION IS CREATED TO FIT BELIEVES,
TWISTS AND TURNS
TO VALIDATE WHAT IS WANTED, NOT WHAT IS NEEDED,
IS IT GOD OR MAN?
I BELIEVE WE CHOOSE, FREEWILL AND ALL,
YOU DON'T,
BUT I DO LIKE YOUR WRITE,
YOU HAVE EXCERCISED THE FREEDOM THAT WE HAVE.
GOD BLESS...
-
You make a good point in this well written poem. Man doesn't know how not to oppress, and will usually find a religion to hide behind.
It's true that where one finds man, one finds repression. No matter what banner they claim, they accuse all others of evil (in the name of a god or justice).
All men tend to be "religious" in one way or the other. Therefore all groups, be it Communism or Darwinism, tribalism or Christianity, you name it, can be guilty. It's unfortunate that the values of their claimed "religion" are set aside in the process.
-
I left a really friggen long comment on this poem and it suddenly didn't appear!
SO here I go again haha.
This poem on the overall, was good. I am not usually a fan of prose, but this was something rather different.
""So in Macbeth the witches aren't the evil you pretend
They just express the way the future looks.
It's goodly men, who plot and scheme, to do away a friend
Not women acting as unlikely cooks"
A very powerful stanza rearing your poem, really brought home a powerful message.
I noticed you failed to spell the mentioned religions without a capital letter. At first I thought this a gramatical error, but from reading the rest of your poem, I see this as a very clever dig at the religions.
Smart technique!
Thanks for entering the contest and best of luck!
Peace and Respect!
Trent! -
I note the 'sermon' of the notes.
This poem follows a different trajectory. It follows a path of grave levity. I smiled but took the guts of it seriously.
"The Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran too
Are arenas where the gods of man make sport.
There, evil men all use their gods to tell them what to do
When the real truth is "do just what you ought".
Compare my adjustments with your verse.
Supernatural hags or objective correlatives for evil, the witches are real. Why? Evil in the abstract is real.
Is it not?
This poem raises essentially deep questions but there can be no QED.
"Christianity" is one thing; an individual living according to the main precepts of Christ could not be a Macbeth!
A provocative poem and rightly so! Your stanzaic pattern, poet, is not taken for granted.
Lyndon of the Winklings.
-
"So in Macbeth the witches aren't the evil you pretend
They just express the way the future looks.
It's goodly men, who plot and scheme, to do away a friend
Not women acting as unlikely cooks."
And there it is...all of it. I loved this piece. You came in from such a realist point of view that simply shows without all of the 'godly trappings' it simply is what it is.
Thank you for such a delightfully different and most enriching perspective. I adored this wonderfully written work.
Best of luck in this contest. ~Pamela
-
I can see why you have such a bad relationship with God. This makes you seem confused and most likely you were hurt badly at one time or another. Perfectly penned poem, Bravo!
Love,
Amera♥
-
OK you set out your stall, so let me tell you the price of your goods. Pacifism is a rare thing; there are as many Christian pacifists (for example) as there are humanist pacifists, and both are probably shamed by the proportion of pacifists amongst Buddhists, Hindus, and Baha'i. The 20c proved that religion was not the cause of hatred and strife, as the three greatest mass murderers of that century did their worst in the name of atheistic regimes (in ascending order - Hitler, Stalin, Mao).
The problem is people. People do it anyway. If there was no religion, they would still do it.
To the poem. It's flawless.
-
-
I would give bunnies for this wonderful comment, however, I would like to remind you that it is entirely possible that the genocide of the Albanians by the Turks, in some scholarly estimates, goes up to 25 million murdered or displaced, which means murdered in this context. This happened in the same century. It was religious fanatics. Just to be fair and balanced, but you are right that CJ is prejudiced and does not look at the facts.
-
Yep,
Two things, one, it's a poem, like most of my poetry it is loosely founded on me, but I don't slide down moonbeams or dance across oceans. It originally said "rationalist" not "pacifist" but the scan wasn't as good. As it happens I'm not really a Pacifist. I'm not big on always turning the other cheek, it is an excellent first reaction but you should always be ready to defend the undefended. Religion isn't usually the cause of strife, I would argue that the way Mao and Stalin implemented their regimes was at least quasi-religious but it doesn't matter, there are plenty of atheist religions.
Two my point was to highlight the absurdity in the contest parameters, at Shakespeare's time Christianity was certainly not a shining example of "good" nor were practitioners of older religions bad. There was a country in Europe at that time where Catholics Protestants Jews and Pagans could and did peacefully co-exist, it was also the only non Christian state apart from the Ottoman Empire.
Your penultimate paragraph is however bang on my beliefs. People are people, there are good ones and bad ones and in between a vast majority who get on with life.
And your final paragraph, now THAT matters
Thank-you! -
-
You're welcome.
"at Shakespeare's time Christianity was certainly not a shining example of "good" nor were practitioners of older religions bad." But it thought of itself as good, and that is a universal thing. The sisters in "Macbeth" are other-worldly, they do not adhere to our concepts of good or evil, they are described well thus: "The earth hath bubbles, as the water has, And these are of them. Whither are they vanish'd?" But elsewhere they are recognisable as "storybook" witches - "aroint thee, witch" one reports a woman as saying. The latter was a sop to King James VI/I who, of course, wrote a famous treatise on witches.
In my own poem, they are unpredictable, "imperfect speakers", and tell the truth in lies... -
-
My contrast was for the modern Christian, the treatise asked how a Christian should play a witch, and then went on to talk about playing good and evil characters. I wished to highlight that if the modern Christian actually wanted to be a Christian they needed to look rather more deeply into the question they were asking.
-
-
Absolutely. Point taken.
-
-
And,
I agree with you, Mairi.
-
-
Always a good policy.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Adding your comment:
1 - 48 of 48
