This is a nice story about what could happen if you stop believing in hell.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/304/heretics
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Flying Spaghetti Monster headgear
You've gotta fight
for your fight
to wear religious headgear of your choice.
Spaghetti strainer legally acceptable
for your fight
to wear religious headgear of your choice.
Spaghetti strainer legally acceptable
Monday, February 13, 2012
Wedding pomp
Personally, I think it's the 8th Anniversary that should have the large public ceremony (survive the seven-year itch?). THAT is the accomplishment that should be celebrated (that is, if you believe in life-long commitments). Why have a pompous ceremony for lust and blind foolishness - the natural drive to reproduce? That and expensive coffins are grandiose demonstrations of throwaway culture. The marriages get shorter and the weddings get bigger. p.s. if I and my 2nd marriage make it 8 years, I'll then be 60.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Coroner says death could have been prevented
Well, when was the last time a religious doctrine was changed on the advice of a coroner? Oh - hey - didn't the Pope recently advocate for condoms - not for birth control, but for recreational sex?
Coroner says end ban on blood
Coroner says end ban on blood
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Jehovah's posh diggs?
This is an option I think all religions should have - free lodging, and not just primitive, in New York City?
Free Lodging in Old-Brooklyn Elegance
Free Lodging in Old-Brooklyn Elegance
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Sharing...
hmmm... in my youth, it was the church potluck. As the secular world ventures into replacing those functions...
Nolo Press: The Sharing Solution
Nolo Press: The Sharing Solution
Saturday, August 1, 2009
10% or 10:1 Social Contract
How much more are one person's skills and labor worth compared to another's?
Ben & Jerry's corporate effort to keep salaries within the company at a 10:1 ratio were a failure. Their goal was that the highest paid executive would make no more than 10 times the lowest paid employee. Over time, they said they couldn't get qualified executives for that lowly amount (or couldn't make any money paying people higher than minimum wage?) I mean, how rich should someone get selling ice cream ? Or, do you need the most highly qualified financial wizards in the country to manage the sales of ice cream ? What's wrong with this picture?
Well, Ben & Jerry washed their hands of the idealistic failure, sold the financially successful company to a giant conglomerate, and feel they can do better by donating the millions they made to charity than they could by trying to run a company under higher principles. I've got news for anyone who thinks this is a great model: (secular) charity comes in a poor fourth to corporations, government, and religion.
Many sects mandate or recommend a 10% principle -- that is, you are required or should donate 10% of your income to the church. The churches have gotten wealthy this way.
What if a group of people tried to put Ben & Jerry's 10:1 ratio into real life practice. Let's call it a "social contract group." Individuals participating would form a group whereby the highest paid individuals would agree to assist in some way the lowest paid individuals. The amount of assistance would make their income levels 10:1 -- that is, any income an individual made that was over 10 times the wage of the lowest wage earner would be donated and used by the organization to either supplement the lower income wage or pay for their schooling, or whatever. Presumedly, people being helped could move up in the ranks to reduce their amount of assistance, and give back to the group. The group would seek to be representative of the surrounding socioeconomic environment, accepting new members as it was capable of managing the financial infrastructure.
Ben & Jerry's corporate effort to keep salaries within the company at a 10:1 ratio were a failure. Their goal was that the highest paid executive would make no more than 10 times the lowest paid employee. Over time, they said they couldn't get qualified executives for that lowly amount (or couldn't make any money paying people higher than minimum wage?) I mean, how rich should someone get selling ice cream ? Or, do you need the most highly qualified financial wizards in the country to manage the sales of ice cream ? What's wrong with this picture?
Well, Ben & Jerry washed their hands of the idealistic failure, sold the financially successful company to a giant conglomerate, and feel they can do better by donating the millions they made to charity than they could by trying to run a company under higher principles. I've got news for anyone who thinks this is a great model: (secular) charity comes in a poor fourth to corporations, government, and religion.
Many sects mandate or recommend a 10% principle -- that is, you are required or should donate 10% of your income to the church. The churches have gotten wealthy this way.
What if a group of people tried to put Ben & Jerry's 10:1 ratio into real life practice. Let's call it a "social contract group." Individuals participating would form a group whereby the highest paid individuals would agree to assist in some way the lowest paid individuals. The amount of assistance would make their income levels 10:1 -- that is, any income an individual made that was over 10 times the wage of the lowest wage earner would be donated and used by the organization to either supplement the lower income wage or pay for their schooling, or whatever. Presumedly, people being helped could move up in the ranks to reduce their amount of assistance, and give back to the group. The group would seek to be representative of the surrounding socioeconomic environment, accepting new members as it was capable of managing the financial infrastructure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)