Religion, that and human intollerance.

I propose we ban religion. Aslong as people still can't normally/peacefully co-excist, I say we ban religion.

Not because I have a problem with religion per se, I have the greatest respect for people who believe in whatever they believe, but the problem is, humanity as a whole.

We all pretty much know, that over the course of human history, nothing comes even close to a cause of wars, bloodshed, torturing people because they were "different" and who knows whatever reasons/causes in name of their gods.

The problem lies within our extremely low tolerance for others. And it is in that, that I believe that religions are just fuel for the fires. We alraedy discriminate enough as it is based on sex or skin color as it is. Think about the current hate of the islam going through the world, simply because we needed a scape goat. Something bad happened, though there may be people involved who share a common religion, the world now turns an evil eye to them.

But incidentally, alot of people at the same time, are also doing thigs for this religion. They are willing to die for their "god", even if it is under false premises. And that's scary. People who will blindly throw away their lives, for a promise of glory in the name of their god.

But there's also a huge other problem I have with, for example, the bible.

But for this example, I'd also like to bring in the one most important law we have. We have the right to be who we want to be, with the freedom of speech, original thought and all that comes with it. One important rule applies, you should not insult/hurt anyone in any possible way (discrimination for example) with this. We're allowed to have those thoughts, but aslong as we remain civil about it, it's okay.

That also brings us too part two, people also have the freedom to practice religion, aslong as this doesn't interfere with formely mentioned.

HUGE PROBLEM.

It actually says in the bible, that it is sinfull to share a bed with someone of the same gender. Discrimination, based on who a person actually is. And people cling so desperatly to this, they pay no mind to other people's feelings. They argue it's a mistake their all powerful God made, that they are imperfect creatures, in an otherwise imperfect world.

Here's a counter arguement, proving how narrowminded such vision is:

God actually shaped man in his own image. God has love for ALL of his creatures. If this is true, god is also homosexual, or at the very least, bisexual. You cannot say that God shaped us in his image, and then deny the fact that people created (also in this very same image), are simlpy a mistake of God.

Ironically, people who are homosexual, do believe in that very same god.

So where did this all go wrong?

The low tollerance, mankind suffers from.

And this brings me back to my original point, aslong as we cannot peacefully co-excist without religion, there shouldn't be any.

The moment we start apreciating others for who they are, stop judging them for who they are. Skin color, sexuality, sex, it should not matter.

So when we finally achieve this, maybe we can then we can truly apreciate a religion more.

Legally criminal.

For people who are from the Dutchlands, this subject has been on the news the past week:

The luring of criminals.

It's a known concept that the police uses various forms of lure, for example, a lure bike (a normal bicycle, unlocked or poorly locked), lure granny's (for muggers and the likes), lure trucks (cargo trucks with precious cargo) and so on.

There's been a debate going on wether the use of these lure objects is permitted and legally justified. Luring is okay, aslong as whoever is commiting the crime, was not provoked into doing it. Now it has been defined this way: provoking means that you lured someone into doing something that they didn't plan to do. Example: the lure bike is not locked, therefor it provokes to be stolen. You'll have to pardon my French, but I found that to be utter bullshit. For starters, it's an impossible standard to measure. There is no way you can ever know wether that person was going to steal said bike or was tempted to. And if you have a little bit of knowledge, you can always defend yourself, saying you were provoked.

I've read of a case where this happened once, and all charges were dropped (big deal, it was just a bike, but that means there is a start, and who knows where it will end). This was based on the principle of being provoked, since then, police has to be extremely carefull when using lures. Some of the lures I found rather interesting where the one of a girl, who might dress a little sexy. This ofcourse, to lure sexual predators. But according to the provoke rulement, it pretty much comes down to: if you get raped because you dress a little too sexy, you asked for it. If you didn't lock your bike, you're begging for it to be stolen.

The fundamental FLAW here, is that we are protecting the rights of the criminals here. If I see a bike, unlocked, I am in no way provoked to steal it. Simply because I have common decency. Even if someone walked up to me naked, the thought of sexually assaulting that person would never ever cross my mind. I'd merely suggest she'd put some cloths on, it's cold outside these days.

I don't get where our society is going, how can we focus so much of the rights and privileges of wrong doers and totally forget to protect the innocent. If you plan to do wrong, you will do so anyway, it'll just happen a little sooner because of luring. And I rather have those people off the strees sooner then later, just so it'll be a little more safer for us.

Introducing:

ME!

But on a more serious note, this post will be more of an introduction really. I plan to write (a rather long) entry once a week. I'll cut into larger or smaller subjects, varying from politics to ethics, or dabbing into more philosophical issues. I'll be giving you my (maybe sometimes harsh) view on the subject of my chosing, hoping to provoke you (the reader) to engage me into a discussion about said subject.

I'll be updating every friday evening/night if I have the time to do so, else saturday at the very latest.