The Existential Crisis of Gay Marriage

It is a rare privilege indeed to witness the moment a persons deeply held convictions, those most precious beliefs we all shield behind lest the bone-chilling isolation of the universe overwhelms us, are suddenly rattled. We’ve recently been privy to a very public display of such rattling in response to the claimed rise of “militant secularism”. The very fact an array of uncoordinated peoples and events have been dubbed with a catchy but misleading title is a sure sign of rising unease. Much as “pro-lifers” named themselves such to imply that all who disagree with them are somehow anti-life, those who have been unsettled by recent public debate centring on their religious beliefs have attempted to frame people on the other side of the argument as rabidly anti-religious and potentially on the verge of violence.

David Quinn writing in the Irish Catholic neatly summarised the existential issues facing the religiously endowed. Topping his list of “’aggressive’ or ‘militant’ secularism trying to push religion out of public life” is apparently the “huge popularity of aggressively anti-religious books” such as ‘The God Delusion’ and ‘God is not Great’. This is an interesting argument to make when one considers the militant content of these books compared with that of, say, the Bible. Mr Quinn goes on to name a host of other contemporary issues that, with the odd exception, range from the banal to the frankly ridiculous (apparently Ireland’s “[f]ormer Justice Minister, Dermot Ahern, advised politicians not to let religion ”cloud” their judgement.” The horror).

Regardless of how representative or otherwise Mr Quinn’s list is of a rising militant secularism, the issues he mentions have certainly lead to a strident defence of the religious basis of freedom to discriminate. It has been particularly fascinating to watch people demonstrating their small-mindedness, in a most literal sense. A common response to the gay-marriage debate has been an incredulous scoffing of “What next? People marrying multiple partners, or even their siblings?!”, only to be met with a polite “Sure, go nuts”. For the religiously outraged it has been literally unfeasible that some people might actually want to be polygamous. The liquid nature of societal norms is seeping into their sinless bubbles, acting as an unwelcome reminder of the relativity of human morals and forcing a confrontation with the hypocrisies inherent in their arguments.

You might think, for the Catholics at least, these debates have been a positive lesson in renewing their faith, for didn’t the Pope himself declare agnostics most holy due to the fact they are “constantly exercised by the question of God” and hence are “closer to the Kingdom of God than believers whose life of faith is ‘routine’ and who regard the Church merely as an institution, without letting their hearts be touched by faith.”  Rational criticism is hammering upon the walls of their institutional routines; will this be an opportunity for believers to develop a fuller appreciation of the relationship between faith and society?

I would guess not. The more likely outcome is an ever burgeoning retreat to simplistic fundamentals and a rising cry of victimisation. It’s an unfortunate habit that those with the least confidence in their beliefs often shout the loudest, and I’ve seen little in way of meaningful argument and much in the way of shouting. Of course this applies equally to all us human apes, doomed to wander the planet with a brain just big enough to wonder but just small enough to not realise the staggering unimportance of it all. Secularists as much as anyone are vulnerable to losing sight of the big picture and getting caught in a cycle of trying to shout down the shouters. That way madness, and a dysfunctional society, lie.

Has Our Idiot Culture Come Home to Roost?

In 1992 Carl Berstein, one of the driving forces behind the breaking of the Watergate scandal, consistently referred to as one of the greatest pieces of investigative journalism in history, wrote a scathing piece on the state of the media in the United States. He lamented the pollution of the media message, in particular that “coverage is distorted by celebrity and the worship of celebrity; by the reduction of news to gossip, which is the lowest form of news; by sensationalism, which is always a turning away from a society’s real condition; and by a political and social discourse that we – the press, the media, the politicians, and the people – are turning into a sewer.” 

Confessions of a Difficult Bind

There is much to be gained from a Catholic upbringing; the life-altering guilt of existence is probably the one thing that will stay with you the longest, however. Baked into the very essence of old-school Catholicism is the acceptance of humanity’s sinful and unworthy nature. Over and over again, from the welcoming of a new life into the Church, to bidding farewell to the recently deceased, our failings in the eyes of god are relentlessly hammered home. Such endless criticism would eventually get trying for even the most devote, one imagines, so thankfully Catholicism includes a full-proof method of absolving oneself of guilt in the form of the Act of Confession.

Anthropomorphised Information Wants To Be Free As In Beer

In light of George Monbiot’s recent smack down of academic publishing I thought I might dust off this piece on open access articles what I wroted many internet moons ago.

The open access “movement” has existed for decades, but with the coming of the digital age in the 90’s it truly bloomed as the distribution cost of electronic media dropped to essentially nothing. Some groups completely embraced the paradigm-shifting potential of the internet; open-source software and piracy being the main examples which come to mind. And while individual scientific disciplines took advantage of the new, more efficient way of searching for and distributing information, the science community as a whole has still not seemed to have tapped into the full potential offered by the near limitlessly connected world in which we now live.

The Murky World of the Tea Pushers

Tweets from the gaily be-haired @KrystalSim a few weeks back reminded me of some twaddle I penned many moons ago about the unexpected existence of the Tea Advisory Panel and the UK Tea Council. For some reason it got lost in my labyrinthine files, so below is an updated and edited version…

Back at the end of 2009 I noted the Mail, Express and Telegraph had once again fired up their “[Random Item] {Helps/Hinders/Cures/Causes} [Aspect of Health]” automatic headline generators. The journalists had turned their mighty intellect to that most beloved of tonics, tea, claiming that a report showed eight cups a day could help fight heart disease, reduce the risk of stroke, positively impact mental functioning and increase life span. The author of the report, dietitian Dr Carrie Ruxton, was quoted as saying “People who cut out caffeinated drinks may miss out on the potential health benefits of the compounds they contain”.

The Wondrous Inconsequentiality of I

I am not a creature of cosmic scale, though you would not know it if one considered my ego alone. I am one of the universes most important entities, so I(t) might have you believe. Having spent millennia evolving to the point of self awareness, my consciousness is loathe to give up its apparently privileged position. It considers itself unique; unique and above average amongst billions. The world lies at my feet, though I have not yet risen to take my rightful place. There is a universe of possibilities which could be mine, should I choose to apply myself. If I was not so crippled with procrastination I would be potential unbounded.

The most minor of inconveniences; a spilt beverage; a missed bus; renders me a-flutter with impotent anger. Worse still if I find another consciousness to blame for said indignities, for nothing makes a fragile ego feel safer than putting another in its place. Failing actual evidence of blame I can while away hours ruminating on the perceived transgressions of others.

I am weighed down with the unimportance of everyday life. What does it matter if the materials I wear upon the meaty frame that houses my nervous system do not impress the other consciousnesses who stumble across the face of this planet by my side? What impact on the universe will my choice of career, of partner, of breakfast, actually have? None, though I dally all the same.

I choose to spend my time penning self-indulgent prose rather than furthering the wellbeing of my fellow travelers on this trip around the sun. Though what ultimate end, when all is said and done, does helping others achieve, but to sooth my egos worry at its own powerlessness and lack of worth?

Indeed, I am not a creature of cosmic scale, though you would not know it if one considered my ego alone.

Call Me The Chattering Classes

As an opening gambit for engaging with and, one would assume, persuading readers of the veracity of the argument you are about to lay out, insulting those who disagree with you and telling them they are outright wrong- in the very title of your piece- is certainly an interesting move. Such behaviour would be less than surprising in a random blog post, I admit. But “Assisted Suicide – how the chattering classes have got it wrong” is the latest policy report from the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS), a conservative think tank that “develops and promotes policies to limit the role of the state, to encourage enterprise and to enable the institutions of society – such as families and voluntary organizations – to flourish.” A noble aim, to be sure, which makes the childish title of the report all the more jarring.

Muhammad! Homosexuals! Meat Loaf! An epic musical in the making.

As that unsung giant of legal philosophy, Meat Loaf, once pondered, “Is nothing sacred any more”? No, is the short answer, and Lord Justice Law managed to come to this refreshingly sensible conclusion without a single key change or multiracial backing choir while dismissing the case of Gary McFarlane, a marriage guidance counsellor sacked for refusing to give sex therapy to homosexual couples due to his Christian beliefs. Lord Carey of Clifton, the former archbishop of Canterbury, had gone to the effort of providing a witness statement supporting McFarlane, in which he claimed that cases such as these should be heard by a hand picked group of five lords justices “who have a proven sensibility to religious issues”. The ex-archbishop also suggested that the “anti-christian” feeling in the country could lead to civil unrest.

You can’t do that, we’re tolerant!

The Guardian reports that Belgium is moving towards a ban on wearing of the Islamic burqa and niqab in public. In what has to qualify as one of the most idiotic statements I’ve read in months, and I can only hope it is due to a loss of context in translation, Daniel Bacquelaine, the liberal MP who proposed the bill, said-

“We cannot allow someone to claim the right to look at others without being seen. It is necessary that the law forbids the wearing of clothes that totally mask and enclose an individual. Wearing the burqa in public is not compatible with an open, liberal, tolerant society.”

Once again science trumps religion by proving religion works. Wait…

“Here’s a little science. The practice of religion is good for you.”

So claim 110 posters (reproduced in miniature below) on bus shelters scattered around Dublin this Easter period. Delivering a message that, if nothing else, is sure to crease a number of foreheads in ironic confusion, the ad campaign has been organised by conservative Catholic think tank the Iona Institute. Their website states it-

“…promotes the place of marriage and religion in society. We defend the continued existence of publicly-funded denominational schools. We also promote freedom of conscience and religion.”