There Is No God So Just Ride the Damn Bus

I can't believe the Ottawa Transit Committee has voted to prevent the Freethought Association of Canada from posting a paid advertisement on the city's buses (actually I can believe it – this city has a dearth of leadership and testicles). The ad would have stated, "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." My only problem with the ad is its lack of decisiveness. There is no god.

Once again, the loyalty to an invisible man prevents logic and free speech. Once again those who believe in the black book of fables have gotten their way and those of us with the ability to reason, deduce, and speak intelligently have been asked to just quiet down. I, as usual, fail to understand how a group of people who are able to throw so much blind faith into unproven stories of impossible acts can be so thrown out of kilter by a bus ad that claims their beliefs are "probably" false. Does it make any sense to you that those who see it logical to pray for outcomes rather than act for outcomes would be so offended by a statement from those who do not share their views? Surely such strength in conviction would give you the confidence and security that a claim of probable non-existence of your deity would be inconsequential to society. Plus, couldn't they just pray that those who read it will dismiss it? Hmm, maybe they prayed that the Ottawa Transit Committee would ban the sign outright. That's it – makes sense to me now.

You know, I come across public displays of religion all the time. I usually think they are dumb but they certainly don't insult me (although, I am insulted when they show up at my door in the form of a human placard asking me to "sign up"). Even if they did insult me, is that any reason to make it illegal for them to exist? Why can't the rigidly religious just "drop a set" and stop acting so insecure? Why do they fear that the sight of a mere bus sign will result in the annihilation of their faith? Maybe because deep in their hearts they know they are throwing their faith at a pile of crap but are afraid of the off chance that claiming such would result in eternal occupancy in the "hotlands." That's what I think. Most people who claim to be religious really aren't at all. They just don't have the courage to act and think freely and chalk their "sins" up to human nature.

This brings us back to the bus sign. I'm going to end this post as an insulting virtual religious salesman at your front door. If you're on the "bubble" of free thought and need a hand to guide you off the precipice to logical living - take mine. You'll love the freedom of knowing that you're a good person just because you are. Not because you're afraid not to be.

GFY Canada

There is not going to be anything eloquent about my writing today - not that I claim it to be as such on a regular basis anyway. I just need to make a few things clear about this constitutional cluster fuck. I recognize the constitutional legitimacy of the coalition government. My discontent with it is not based on an incorrect notion that it is illegal, unconstitutional, or even undemocratic. My issue with this pathetic coalition is based on morals and ethics, not parliamentary nuances. Just because something is legal does not make it morally or ethically sound. I could choose to sleep around on my wife. Technically, I am doing nothing illegal. Jumping in the sack with a different woman every day this week does not make me a criminal. It does make me an asshole. The Dion/Layton/Duceppe coalition is not illegal. It is just morally wrong. It is obvious that Layton had this up his sleeve the day after the election. Anyone willing to argue with me on this one is just plain stupid or ill-informed (which I recognize is the majority of Canadians who vote for this fool). To dress this coalition up as economy crusaders is a slap in the face of the minority of Canadians that have the intelligence and integrity to see it for what it is. And believe me folks, it is a minority (yes I have lost all faith in this country). This coalition is an unreasonable response to a relatively benign economic statement. It is nothing more than a disguised grab for power. People will say that Harper used a constitutional loophole to have parliament prorogued - maybe so. But don't overlook the fact that this coalition is also born from a parliamentary loophole. Are you seeing a trend? The British Parliamentary System is fucked.

If Mr. and Mrs. Dion (or is it Layton) had come out and said, "we are forming this coalition because we hate Harper's guts and the fact that we keep losing to him" I would have had some respect for them. But this economy bullshit is more of what I come to expect from this now unified party of socialist sell-outs.

I have said all along that my disgust with this coalition is non-partisan. Quite frankly there is no party in this pathetic country that represents me any more. I was hoping for a Liberal revival under Mr. Ignatiefff however he too has disappointed me (see previous post). I know Harper is an arrogant prick but at least he can put together a high quality video clip and understands the concept of a deadline. Dion not only missed the deadline, but he put together a video recorded on someone's cell phone. Not that higher quality video would have made him any more understandable.

This post ain't gonna end with a clever musing. This country just sucks.

Dear Mr. Ignatieff,

I am disappointed in your support of the coalition government. I have voted Conservative in the last two elections not because I identify myself as such, but because I was uncomfortable with Liberal leadership at the time. I consider myself just a tad right of center but a “centrist” nonetheless. In this last election I encouraged friends and family to once again vote Conservative for one simple reason: to ensure that Mr. Dion would be unsuccessful and consequently forced out of leadership. I knew the Conservative Party would not win a majority and within a few years we would be back at the polls. My hope was that you would win the Liberal leadership race and I would finally have choice. I felt that you best represented my values and interests and would bring the Liberal party back into relevance and closer to the center. I was excited about this possibility. I have watched your emergence on the Canadian political scene and was greatly disappointed when victory was stolen from you at the last Liberal leadership convention.

On the weekend I heard rumours that you were struggling with the idea of this coalition. I told my wife that this didn’t surprise me and I hoped you would publically voice your disproval for it and recognize it for what it is: opportunistic greed. I am not sure if these rumours were true but it no longer matters – you are publically supporting it. I had hoped that this would be your chance to differentiate yourself from the type of politician that Canada has been forced to get used to over the last six years. I thought you would stand for integrity and truth and demonstrate your courage to stand up for honesty. I am disappointed that you haven’t.

Mr. Ignatieff, this coalition has nothing to do with the economy. If it did, your party would have backed down when Mr. Harper rescinded the clauses on public financing for political parties, the right for civil servants to strike, and announced that there would be an early budget in January. If it did your party would recognize the impact an unstable government has on consumer confidence and the markets. Canada has withstood the economic downturn better than any industrialized nation. Whether you care to admit it or not this has much to do with the handling of our economy over the last two years under Conservative government. This is not a partisan statement – just a simple observation. Quite simply I do not feel your party’s response to this economic statement is reasonable or proportionate to the details within it. Over the last two years your party has chosen to sit on their hands during votes on Afghanistan, the environment, and immigration reform – issues far more significant than the recent economic statement. Issues on which your party publically opposed the Conservative government. Yet, it appears to the casual observer that when public funding for your party was threatened your party suddenly had the energy and passion to lose confidence in the government. Does public financing of political parties trump the environment? Afghanistan? This all leads me to believe that this coalition was weeks in the making.

I recognize Mr. Harper’s arrogance and stubbornness. However this alone is not a reason to form a coalition with a far-left party to be propped up by an outfit destined to separate from our country. You missed your chance to stand out as a true leader – something for which Canada is starving. I really thought you represented change but your poor judgment this week leads me to think otherwise.

You have lost my support Mr. Ignatieff and that disappoints me. I was excited to work on your behalf and voice my support in the next election. After your decision to support this coalition I will be unable to do so.