Skip to main content

Religionphobia

I'm not really too put off by the Muslim practice of having more than one wife, but it does lead to the question, how does that add up?

Assuming the gender balance is about 50-50, notwithstanding the plethora of new genders that have been recently introduced, if some guys have more than one wife, others will have none. It's a zero sum game. Maybe balance could be achieved by allowing women to have more than one husband.

I'd be cool with that. So, I would expect, would be Kathleen Wynne. Whether such a policy would garner much support from Muslim voters remains an open question.

Warfare, where most of the dead are males, could also relieve the imbalance, along with life-like robots and cloning.

I don't have a problem with Islam. Many of my coworkers in the cab business are Muslims. I am fortunate to be friends with many of these people, and to learn that they are the same as everyone else, or perhaps more precisely, as unique as everyone else.

On the other hand, I don't ever want to have anyone's religion shoved down my throat. After all, I think that all religions are nothing more than superstitious bullshit. To be commanded to respect what is, in my opinion, a bunch of irrational horse-shit, is highly offensive to me. And don't I   have the right not to be offended? Or is that "right" to be portioned off to certain identity group members, in proportion to how many votes sleazy politicians figure this identity-group gerrymandering will earn them?

There-in lies my dilemma, and the core of my concern about immigration policy.

Europe: Making Islam Great Again

I am an Islamaphobe. I am also a Christianityphobe, a Judaismphobe, and a phobe of any similar system of thought that attempts to enslave the mind of man with any arbitrary series of edicts or rituals, the stated goal of which is to guarantee moral stature, personal fulfillment, and possible immortality. But the result of which is the cultivation of a bunch of compliant sheep. I don't want to be a part of anyone's flock.

Which, by the way, is also why I fucking hate communism.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Uber Driver Oh my. This is a sad story. Here is an Uber driver voicing his concerns in the Uber driver's forum about whether or not his "sharing economy" gig is paying off. It's possible that this is not a genuine post from a genuine Uber driver. I see that. It's the kind of schlopp I would write if I were in a mischievous mood. On the other hand, given what I already know about the Uber scam, and the people it exploits in order to get them to employ "assets they already own," in Tim Hudak's famous phrase, it's entirely reasonable to believe that this is a REAL Uber driver, who is just beginning to figure out who is making money, or should be making money, and who is getting royally boned. (See my story about the Uber driver who drove a football player from Chicago to Buffalo for minus $38.50.) I knew it was a scam from the beginning. That is why, when people asked me why, instead of tolerating the City of Hamilton's demonstrably abs…
My Encounter with an Uber Cab Driver I had an encounter with an Uber cabbie this morning. When I pulled into the parking lot at the front of my townhouse complex, I noticed this guy sitting in a small, Uber-like car, staring at this dash-mounted smart-phone, and looking confused. He was sitting in front of unit #1. I got out of my car and started walking toward my own unit which is also numbered. It's not a gigantic complex, so in my simple, low-tech, cab driver's mind, I figure that if you are looking for a unit number at an address, the first thing you should do is look at the number on the unit. If that number is "1" the next thing you do is look at the number on the next unit. Often, though not always, that number is either a "2" or a "3" depending upon the numbering format. In my complex, the next number is "2" and so on. For a taxi driver that information can be critical. So this guy looks up at me as I am walking by, and ask…
Fluid Law and how Uber Successfully Exploited It The guy almost gets the story. One thing he misses, though, is how Uber, with its "Madison Avenue" strategy is able to exploit the natural, systemically inevitable, corruptibility of most politicians. This whole Uber phenomenon would not have been successful at all, given that taxi regulations already exist, unless they could get the politicians on board, and convince them, or persuade them to pretend they actually believe, that Uber was not in the taxi business. Hence, Uber taxis are exempt from existing taxi regulations. Most people would interpret this state of affairs as a tilting of the playing field, which it is. The sleazebags at Hamilton's City Hall came up with the term, "New Licensing Category" in order to facilitate Uber's circumvention of the existing taxi bylaw. "New Licensing Category" is nothing but a code word for tilting the playing field in favour of a politically sexy fad. I…