THE MEN WHO PLAY GOD

I am sure some of you at least once in your life have come across somebody who made the statement "Men should never play God."

For me, I came across that particular statement last night in class when we were talking about Stem Cell research and Cloning of other human beings etc. Some of the people in the class argued that they were against both stem cell research and clonings because they think that 'human beings' should not play God. We should not mess with what God has created or made natural.

Their argument struck me as completely absurd for these various reasons. Right now in the world, we have processed foods, foods that are made artificially for example fruits, tomatoes etc. They are able to be made without being grown and that's just one instance. Not to talk about the other instances where Doctors play God by saving human life through science and technology.

One of the other arguments some people in the class made was that if we cloned ourselves, it might be a prodigy. In the sense that it may lead to the over population of the world and disrupt the natural balance. Plus the science gained from stem cell research could figure out a way to stop people from aging and that would mean that people lived way longer than they should. Their argument again struck me as odd because they were arguing that supporting that kind of science would be nothing short of human beings playing God. I then asked them if they realised that human beings had  been 'playing God' way before any of us were born? In the natural world, if you get sick or you contact natural diseases those diseases are a way of nature to root out the weak and keep the strong. It's also a natural way to balance the earth population, but human beings decided to invent drugs and medicine which would cure us from those natural diseases in essence making us live longer.

If those drugs did not exist, the only respite we as human beings would have as  a cure is to pray to God and hope he answers us just like they did in the days of the bible. If God spurned our prayers, we would basically be screwed. So when they say 'we human beings are playing God' then they should realise that in order to stop playing God we need to get rid of all the scientific advances that have been made in order to enable we humans to be more effective.

The other aspect of this that I found bemusing was the fact that the very same people who say "Human Beings should not play God" are the very same people who credit God with the advances made by doctors, scientists etc. Sometimes when you ask people if you believe in God and not science why do you not only pray to God when your sick and let him heal you, why do you go to the doctor. Some people will respond with, how do you know it's not God working through the doctors?

My point is, if then it is God working through the doctors, scientists etc. Then the breakthroughs made in the medical and science profession are obviously of God's doing abi? So cloning and stem cell research are obviously approved by God.

I will define what stem cell research is for those who may not know what it is
Stem Cell Research - Stem cell research is a developing technology that focuses on using undifferentiated cells therapeutically to treat human disease and injury. Stem cells are primitive or unspecialized cells that can assist in tissue repair and rejuvenation. When they divide, stem cells have the potential to become any type of cell needed, such as brain, blood or muscle cells.

Basically the cells when separated can become any type of cell and they can be used to cure people with diseases such as cancer etc. The controversy behind it is that the cells are gotten from human embryos and so there is this whole argument as to whether a human embryo is a human being or not. 

Africans and Homophobia--Make the Change

If you know me, then you know I used to be a homophobe. I knew a couple of queer people in boarding school and being at a stage when we usually ganged up, or walked in groups, it was relatively easy to absorb prejudices against gay people. I mean we didnt single gay people out, walking in gang just made you egalitarian with your prejudice: we hated on people that wore rubber sandals and people that didnt want to be lawyers, doctors or engineers or people that had the misfortune of being in the bottom in the bottom half of the class. I digress, all i want to point out was that being in a clique often made it easy to hate on the outsiders.

As I grew as a person though, and matured into thinking for myself (and might I add, after I had left school so no risk of a random gay dude butt-raping me, but thats my vestigial homophobia speaking lol ), I started evaluating these attitudes I had, to understand why I held them. Why didnt I like to be around gays, even though I had nothing against them? And I found out...nothing.

There was no reason whatsoever. (Oh yea, i mean concrete reasons, paranoia doesnt count.)

The prejudice i had against them was just that: a prejudice. Does the bible condemn it? Maybe, maybe not. If we condemn everything Scripture said was wrong, Jesus would have wacked the shit outta the adulterous woman. He had every right to, I mean, he was as sinless as they come. But he didn't because he was giving us a model: humanity trumps morality. What you think is right or wrong should not get in the way of the respect we have for ourselves as people. And while I cannot claim to understand them completely, gay people, are first and foremost, people. Not a subset, like society wants us to believe. There is no such thing as a subset of people.No one has figured out people. People will be people: we cant be understood. We are all fallen trying to reach back to the vision of perfection : gay, straight, trans, all races, all classes, all religions.

If we want to criticise people on moral grounds, be equally moral for all gender expressions and sexual orientations. This is one area where Africa, is unfortunately, still too clingy towards its past. People justify their bias by saying , homosexuality is not in our culture. Well it is now! C'mon son! Neither was cinema, clubbing, facebook, flying in planes, Christianity, Islam, democratic politics and gin and juice but they're all part of it now. (And by accepting it wanst part of our culture, I dont say it didnt exist, but it wasnt engaged in by a significant portion of the people, or openly enough to be registered as part of their reality.) But today homosexuals are seeking expression. We subject them to a life where they have to be brave to be who they are, all bcos we cant let the past go? So will you be the wife of Lot that will stare back at visions lost? or will you welcome a new African culture, a blend of the past, present and near future? All Im saying is, times have changed. Arent you all the ones going on about change? If Greece had held on to 'culture and tradition' they would have died as city-states instead of emerging as a unified country that launched a global culture. If America held on to tradition, black people would still be slaves or worse yet, they would still be allegiant to the British crown. If people held on to every single tradition, our modern age would never have arisen gaddamit! We cannot hold on to a culture that glorifies dehumanisation, or continue to live in denial of the reality of our times. There are parts of our culture that deserve being held on to, our arts, our history, our language, our dress, our sense of worth and value and work ethic, our spirit of tolerance. People are all too quick to sweep these under the carpet, but when it comes to homosexuality, we suddenly become African ambassadors. Never mind the fact that some of these people we hate have done more to promote African culture and keep it alive than some of us have.

I guess all Im saying is, we need to join the rest of the world in the new age. Lets bring our African flair into it, and let us not, in the new global culture be known as the continent of homophobes. Let people see the hospitality, tolerance and communal bond we are known for. Change is inevitable. Maybe we were a dogmatic society in the past. But new information and new realities demand a new orientation.Instead of finding justification to hate in your religion, find justification to love. Thats what most religions are about. Thats what humans are about. But if you choose to be stuck in a state of mind that is judgmental or tries to make people into what they are not, then you need to answer some questions. First of which is: Are you God?

THE WIKILEAKS CONTROVERSY

This Thanksgiving weekend, the website Wikileaks released eighty thousand documents regarding the U.S State Departments policies to foreign nations across the world. The release of the documents have brought about deep embarrassment to the U.S State Department. Various Politicians/pundits have called for the source of the leak to be investigated and the leaker charged with treason and executed. Some pundits also admonished news organizations who published the information leaked on their websites/newspapers/news channel.

I am of the opinion that the leaks deserve to be published and newspapers/website owners should not be prosecuted for publishing information that was leaked to them. The New York Times was one of the newspapers which published information contained in the leaks and the constitution makes safe guarantees for the press and I believe that the New York Times as a newspaper falls under the protection of those guarantees.
As long as what the newspaper publishes is the truth, the information no matter how damaging to the government should never be censored. It may be put on hold or postponed but it should never be censored in my opinion.

The Wikileaks website has been able to maneuver  the situation to their advantage as the documents released has piqued the interest of many Americans regarding the policies employed by their government.

THE UPROAR OVER TSA SCREENINGS

I have found it amusing that the some of the same people who are so quick to accuse the federal government for playing 'catch up' to terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda are firmly against the new installed screeners at major airports across the U.S.  The Transportation Security Administration have installed new screeners at airports to counter potential terrorists such as the under wear bomber last December who bypassed air port security in Amsterdam and almost succeeded in blowing up a plane destined to U.S shores.

Opponents of the new full body scanners have cited invasion of privacy as one of the reasons why they are against the installment of the scanners.

I personally have no problem with the Full Body Scanners as I believe that they are put there solely for the purpose of protecting Americans from potential terrorists. It is only a minor inconvenience I feel that Americans all over should be willing to bear just to guarantee flight safety.

Some opponents of the Full Body Scanners claim that America should not be "cowering" to the fear brought about by potential terrorist attacks. The TSA should ignore the criticisms of those who are opposed to the Full Body Scanners, afterall the very same people are quick to label the TSA as lacklustre in their approach to air port security whenever an aspiring terrorist gets through air port security.

HOW TO BE A GOOD HOUSEWIFE..

I came across this American High School Home Economics textbook written in the 1950s. It advised younger women on how to be a good wife. It reads in part:

Taken from a 1950's American High School Home Economics textbook, the essay is entitled "How to be a Good Wife." It reads in part:
Have dinner ready. Prepare yourself. Touch up your makeup, put a ribbon in your hair and be fresh looking. He has just been with a lot of work-weary people. Be a little gay and a little more interesting. Clear away the clutter -- run a dust cloth over the tables.
Prepare the children: Take a few minutes to wash the children's hands and faces, comb their hair, and if necessary change their clothes. They are God's creatures and he would like to see them playing the part.
Minimize all noise…eliminate the noise of the washer, dryer, dishwasher or vacuum. Try to encourage the children to be quiet.
Some Don'ts: Don't greet him with problems or complaints. Don't complain if he is late for dinner. Arrange his pillow and offer to take off his shoes. Speak in a low, soft, soothing and pleasant voice.
Listen to him: You may have dozens of things to tell him, but the moment of his arrival is not the time. Let him talk first. Make the evening his. Never complain if he does not take you out to dinner or other pleasant entertainments.


Reading this amused me to no end because it reminded me of how far we had come as a culture. Most women in America today would rather be caught dead than to adhere to all of these rules, and it made me ponder on whether our cultural values have diminished with time or whether we have changed for the better.

GEORGE W. BUSH ON OPRAH

I watched former President George Bush get interviewed on Oprah today at 4pm. Oprah quizzed Bush about certain decisions he had made during his eight year presidency.
Bush noted that he was really hurt when some people accused him of being a racist and not caring about 'black people' during the New Orleans/Katrina disaster. Musical Hip-Hop artiste Kanye West famously accused George Bush of not 'caring about black people' on MTV's fund-raising telethon for Katrina.

Watching the Interview, allowed me to view the former President in a new light as I came to realize that most people are wont to judge a man in his position without truly knowing the burdens that the job places on a man.

Bush also admitted that he never lost his soul to the politics in Washington. He emphasized that he did not give in to the polls and the popularity contests being conducted within the Washington political circle. Bush stated "Many people chase popularity not realizing that it's a fleeting moment. Popularity does not last forever, but your principles do. I didn't sell my soul for the sake of politics or popularity."
That quote by the President really spoke to me as a person who plans to enter politics sometime in the future, most of the people who do enter politics lose their souls and are never the same. I never want to be the person who loses his soul just to attain power.

HUMAN COMPASSION IS A JOKE

So I just finished watching Blood Diamonds again, and well at the end of the movie they said only 40 countries signed an accord that would stop the illegal sale of diamonds, and that saddened me. There are 200 countries in the world, how can only 40 countries sign an accord that stopped the illegal sale of diamonds. Diamonds production puts a lot of people in third world countries in misery. 

I came across a quote that says "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound"?  When did Human Life become so unprecious? Why has it lost so much value? I discovered thatbefore governments decide whether to go in and stop a genocide, they crunch numbers and see how much money it would cost to go in and end a massacre. Such coldheartedness, how the hell does money compare to Human Life? This is a classic case of "what will it profit a man to gain the whole world yet lose his/her soul". Honestly, humanity has lost it's soul. Human Compassion is now a joke, just because you say "Aww" and "Wow" after hearing about suffering does not mean that you are a compassionate person. 


When I was a christian, I use to honestly get depressed when I taught about why God would let children die in Africa from every sort of thing. I asked myself, why would a God who's supposed to be loving and good let innocent good people die? Why would he let women in Congo get raped repeatedly on a daily basis. And I came across this verse in Roman's 9:15 and I swear that verse changed my outlook on life forever. The verse says "15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 
16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy"


This verse really struck me as frigging cold, so as I dey like this the only reason am doing well is because God decided to have mercy on me, he showed compassion to me and that is why I am able to jolly. But for the loser woman/child/man in Uganda, Somalia, indonesia, pakistan, Sudan etc obviously their own luck has run out. Our heavenly father, has chosen to not show mercy/compassion on them, and well I guess that is their lot in life. This is basically my attitude right now, there is no need to be having pity on such people anymore because they are obviously losers. If God in all his wisdom, could not see it within himself to have mercy on kids such as this child who was stalked by the vulture, why should I a mere human being now have mercy/pity on such a kid? I mean God is wiser than me isn't he? He has already showed that the boy below is not worthy of his mercy. I wonder what I have that that little boy does not have, that the almighty would choose to show mercy/compassion on lil ole me and then neglect to show the same mercy on this boy being stalked by a vulture waiting for it to die. 
If you were God for a day, would you have mercy on this kid? 

  
In conclusion, most of you might not agree with my analysis of this. But more than one of you have wondered about why God would let kids suffer in Africa, Asia etc. Why woulld a loving God let kids live in such misery? I hope that I have clearly proven to you all why such things happen under the almighty's watchful eye. Because he alone decides who he'll show mercy to and who he won't show mercy to.

WHAT MAKES A MAN GOD??

What makes a man God?? Permit me to qualify that question, I mean to ask what qualifications must a man have in order to be considered a God.  

1.
Someone told me that Jesus was obviously a God because he performed miracles. 


But according to the bible,  Jesus was not the only person to perform miracles, Paul, Peter, Prophet Samuel  Moses, Paul, Peter, Jeremiah, Isiah, Ezra etc performed miracles. So obviously if it takes performing miracles for one to be called a God, now all these other people would fall under that category. 

2. Jesus was a God because he 'rose' from the dead. 


If it takes 'rising from the dead' for a man to be considered a God then Lazarus would be considered a God as well. Now some of you will say well, Lazarus was raised from the dead by Jesus and I will say that Jesus was raised from the dead by God. 


3. Jesus was a God because he died on the cross and 'atoned' for our sins.


The fact that a man is crucified and allegedly dies for the sins of other men is not proof enough that the man is a God.


In conclusion, the crux of the matter is that I believe it is impossible to state categorically without proof that the above qualifications made Jesus a God. 

RESPECT THE BELIEVER NOT THE BELIEF.

What kind of world we would have if everybody went around respecting each other's views? What if everybody had decided to respect "Hitler's beliefs" concerning the extermination of the Jews? There wuld be no Jews left. Or maybe if the slave abolitionists had respected the slave owners "beliefs" in owning slaves? There would surely be so many slaves around today. My point is this, everybody and everyone is entitled to his/her beliefs, but not every belief is entitled to my "respect".  I honestly do not get how people can get by in this world perfectly fine without knowing anything. 

Ask the average born again christian or muslim about how they came to trust somuch in their faith, they'll probably start by saying "If you know what God/Allah/Jesus has done for me you would understand why I believe in him somuch", now this is all fair and all but try getting them to share what God did for them and they will narrate a story of how they were in desperate strides and a miracle happened and something good happened to them, the 'something good' that happened is now translated as coming from "God". 
First, this style of argument is an informal fallacy and it falls under False Cause Fallacy. 


Christians "illegitimately assume that one possible cause of a phenomenon is the cause although reasons are lacking for excluding other possible causes" and they do this time and time again, you get a new promotion at work, you get an A on a test, you get a new car you and attribute all this good things to God when it could possibly be other things or even other "supernatural beings" like the devil doing all this good things for you.  A whole lot of us commit informal fallacies almost everytime when trying to prove why something good has happened to us, we immediately assume that it must be God responsible for the good in our lives, but we never attribute the bad things to God, we prefer to blame that on the devil but the almighty never gets any blame.

Now to be fair to both sides, when you meet an atheist who tries to say "God does not exist because he cannot be seen", then that also is a fallacy. Just because you cannot see God, does not mean that he does not exist. 

WOULD AFRICA BE A BETTER PLACE IF THE EUROPEANS HAD NOT COLONIZED US??

Yesterday, I had this question up on my facebook status and more people felt that Africa would have been a better place if the Europeans never colonized it. Personally, I disagreed with the majority and this is why. 

1. Before the Europeans came, we did not know Jesus, we did not know about christianity, and we were definitely headed to hell. So we should be grateful that the Europeans brought the word of God to us and helped us get consecrated to the almighty.


2. We would definitely still be killing twins, the practice of killing twins brought about so much turmoil to and ended after the Europeans banned the practice.

3. Women would still be second class citizens, infact any woman right now that supports the other argument that claims that Africa was better off without the Europeans should bear in mind that women in those times where meant to be seen and not heard.


4. The Europeans provided structure to our way of life. They also brought to us concepts such as democracy that we did not have in our various communities before they came. 

SHOULD THE PEOPLE LIVING IN CONGO/DARFUR PRAY FOR A NATURAL DISASTER??

The Haitian earthquake happened earlier this year in January.  Larry King of CNN celebrities like Jennifer lopez, diddy, Ben stiller on his show. They were all there to raise money for the Haitian victims. 


Before the earthquake, everybody  mama knew that Haiti was an improverished nation? Not many people donated as they donated after the earthquake now? There were ten thousand humanitarian aid agencies in Haiti before the earthquake yet, Haiti was still a poverty stricken nation. 


So what should the people living in poverty-stricken nations such as Darfur, Sudan and Congo do? I suggest that they start praying for their own natural disaster. The world will only come to their rescue if a natural disaster nearly wipes out everybody in city. Why did it have to take the death of a hundred thousand people before the international community paid attention?  


I came across this quote by Martin Luther King which states, ""A man who won't die for something is not fit to live." I struggled with this quote because I was wondering what if the something that is worth dying for is also worth killing for? What then would be the right cause of action?
Are there no good causes that are worth killing as well as dying for? Consider the Islamic extremists/terrorists, most of them are willing to die for whatever cause they are fighting for, but they also feel that that cause is worth killing for as well. And there have been numerous times in history where killing innocent people was seen as worthy enough because the cause was that important. 

RALLY TO RESTORE SANITY VERSUS RALLY TO RESTORE FEAR

When it comes to Television shows, my two favorite hosts are Jon Stewart of the Daily Show and Stephen Colbert of the Colbert Report.  On October 30, 2010 the two TV hosts announced that they would both be holding rallies at the National Mall in Washington D.C. Jon Stewart announced his 'Rally to Restore Sanity" while his colleague Stephen Colbert announced his "March to Keep Fear Alive".

I admire the way that the two comedians use humor to tell the truth about the current and malcontent political climate in the United States. I recall when Stephen Colbert appeared at the Annual Press Dinner in Washington D.C in which former President George Bush was a special guest of honor. Most human beings standing in the presence of the most powerful man in the world would think twice before making any statements that would incur the wrath of the president. Stephen Colbert went up on stage and cracked jokes about the Iraq War, 9/11 and the policies initiated by the Bush Administration.

Watching the video made me realize that comedians have an unique position in society that allows them to speak the truth without fearing any significant backlash. This reminds me of the Oscar Wilde quote that says "Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask and he will tell you the truth." In my opinion, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and other comedians wear the mask of comedy that permits them to flourish and tell the truth about any situation in a humorous fashion, which leaves little room for significant backlash or repercussion.


WORKS CITED

JON STEWART & STEPHEN COLBERT

Rally to Restore Sanity

March to Keep Fear Alive

A SATISFIED PIG OR AN UNSATISFIED HUMAN BEING???

My professor and I where having a conversation after class concerning the issues that we had talked about during lecture. A question was posed in class which asked whether everybody in the class would rather be a "satisfied pig" or an "unsatisfied human being". Naturally, everybody in the class said "Unsatisfied human being" and that answer jolted me into serious reflection. After class I decided to share my thoughts with the professor.


I asked the professor whether it did not strike him as amusing that everybody in the class,  preferred to live their lives as "unsatisfied human beings" than as "satisfied pigs". Most students in the class chose the former instead of the latter because nobody wants to be compared to a pig but in reality, most of us including myself live our lives as satisfied pigs.  Socrates once noted that "the unexamined life is not worth living." The life of a satisfied pig is a life that has not been thoroughly examined, the life of an unsatisfied human being is one that has been examined and reexamined daily. 


My professor conjured up an example in which he reminded me that in a previous class I had taken with him the previous semester, all the students in the class had admitted to ignorance being blissful. In that particular class, the professor had asked us to think back to a time when we were "MOST HAPPY" and most of us referred to our childhood as a time when we were at peace with the world, and not burdened with any responsibilities. He then pointed out to me, that most people preferred to remain as children, ignorant but still in bliss. 
I then made a point to him about how most people always say "life is to short, to be anything other than happy,' but they never seem to realize that the source of one's happiness could stem from them living in ignorance. Would they still pursue knowledge if they knew that with knowledge came misery? 


In conclusion, I believe that most people would prefer to live their lives as an unsatisfied human being rather than a satisfied pig. But in reality, most of us live our lives as satisfied pigs. We do not ponder, we do not investigate, we do not care to know about how kids in China are toiling day and night to make our precious Nike sneaker etc.

A MUSLIM CANNOT BE PRESIDENT OF AMERICA.

I have been following the proposed mosque on Ground Zero debate which has polarized both political parties and different factions across the nation for awhile now. I have gleaned from numerous TV news stations that the role of pundits in the American political arena is to foment controversy and this particular issue has reached a level where some people have started to question President Obama's religious affiliations. A Fox News survey showed that "Nearly 1 in 5 Americans think that Obama is a Muslim" 

I then started to wonder, so what if Obama is a Muslim? How does that affect his presidency anymore than him being a Christian could affect his presidency. I asked some christian friends of mine whether Obama being a muslim would stop them from voting for him. They all said No, I was pleased with their answer but I still pressed on. I asked them why Obama being a Muslim did not bother them? After all, Obama as a Muslim would not have Christian values, his moral standards should naturally come into question. They all said that they would still vote for him because his religion should be different from his candidacy. According to them, religion is a private thing, it should be different from public office.

I changed the question to "If Obama was an atheist, would you still vote for him?" and that is when it got interesting. A lot of them said NO. Now this begs the obvious question, if religion should not play a part in his candidacy why then would you refuse to vote for him if he's atheist? From their responses, I gathered that subconsciously or even consciously,  religion does play a huge role in the way some of us make a decision on who to vote for as candidates for public office.






                                                    
                                                Works Cited


Fox News Survey

TRUTH VERSUS DELUSION

My name is Echeme Emole. I am a junior political science major at San Jose State University, my hope is to become a lawyer after I graduate college and after the completion of law school. The blog title "Truth Versus Delusion" appealed to me when I was trying to come up with a blog name because I firmly believe that most humans face a dilemma in their lifetime between believing the truth about a person or situation or believing in the delusion.

For example, in my Religion and Political Controversy class today. My professor was forced to come to terms with the fact that Billy Graham her hero was a bigot as pointed out by one of the students in class. She admitted that she already knew this but she preferred to maintain the noble picture of Billy Graham that she had always had. On one hand, the truth about Billy Graham was that he was a bigot, the delusion about him was that he was a saint.

Another example given in the same class was Martin Luther King's infidelity while he was married. Martin Luther King is viewed as a role model by modern day society, rarely does the topic of him sleeping with other women while he was married come up. There is the truth about Martin Luther King on one hand, and on the other hand there is the delusion of Martin Luther King.

In conclusion, that is how the title of this blog came about.