By The Arm Chair Pontificator

The senseless murder of 12 human beings in France last week by Islamic extremists got me thinking. Why don’t all Muslims do what the Charlie Hebdo murderers did and kill those they believe to have insulted Mohammad and/or Allah in some way? For that matter, why don’t all Christians hate gay people the way the Phelps family of the Westboro Baptist Church does? And why aren’t all Christians living with their IQ’s stuck in a Bronze Age time distortion field like Ken Ham is? Ken Ham and the Phelps family say they are TruChristians following the same Bible every other Christian claims to follow. As well, Islamic jihadists claim to be following the same Koran every other Muslim claims to follow. So, what separates the extreme fanatics of Christianity and Islam from the more sensible followers of those faiths when their respective Holy Books are the same for everyone who follows them?

One Book, Many Interpretations

I believe there are two simple answers to this question: human decency and common sense. These are things that do not come to us from holy books, political dogmas, or commandments etched by a burning bush into stone tablets. They are inherent in our humanity. Without them, there can be no advancement of civilization. We need them to help us live with each other because we often do not, and can not, see eye to eye on even the most fundamental of things; such as which Holy Book is REALLY the RIGHT holy book and which form of government is TRULY best for everyone. The vast majority of Muslims do not storm satirical magazine offices and slaughter innocent people because they instinctively know, no matter what their Holy Book might say to the contrary, that it would be very wrong to do so. As well, most Christians do not live with their minds stuck in the Bronze Age, do not hate gay people, and do not know what 97% of their Holy Book even says because they’ve never bothered to read it.

One Book, Innumerable Interpretations

Most Christians and Muslims choose not to behave like murdering, bigoted neanderthals because, instinctively, they know it’s wrong to do so. And most know, too, that literal interpretations of violent passages from their Holy Books won’t be tolerated by a civil society.  Thus, they have religious apologists reinterpret these passages into less harmful, and mindlessly convoluted, nonsense that means whatever they want it to mean as long as it isn’t a cry to violence. That, as we’ve determined, is not acceptable. This, to me, is a complete waste of energy which would be better used helping old folks cross the street, clipping a dog’s toe nails, grooming a cat, or feeding a goldfish. Religious apologists who creatively apologize for the disgustingly barbaric passages in archaic holy texts serve no true benefit to our overall society. They aren’t really needed. Neither are archaic, violent holy books.

Archaic Political Dogma In Need Of Changin’

In conclusion, then, I propose the following arm-chair pontification: If your Holy Book, or your particular political dogma, contains hate-filled, barbaric, bigoted rhetoric in any part of it, toss it the fuck out and get a new a one. Don’t spend decades trying to twist nonsensical archaic gibberish into meaningful dogmas for humans in the 21st century. Muslims, Christians and Republicans who behave decently, and humanely, toward all those around you, I implore you to join together and throw away your Korans, your Bibles, and your Second Amendments, and write a new doctrine. A doctrine for the 21st century, and beyond, which places value on all human life equally. A doctrine that deplores violence, bloodshed, homophobia, racism, poverty, and sexism simply because they are wrong and inhumane. Write a doctrine of, and for, Humanity. One that values our very existence, because it is precious, and it is the only one we truly have.