Another Man's Poison
By Carl S ~
There's a current saying: "Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger." l suspect a Darwinian survival list of experiences are behind that saying. An older saw is: "One man's food, another man's poison."
Centuries ago, there was a practice of poison-resistance, when a person would consume ever-increasing doses of poison over time, until he could tolerate an amount that would kill another who had not been exposed to the poison. The resistant one could thus poison another without any concern about being poisoned himself, accidentally or intentionally; a sure way to guarantee that the other would die.
Maybe indoctrination works like that. The poisons of indifference to another's sufferings, of intolerance, and acceptance of the irrational, are sneaked in small doses, into the minds of children with a spoonful of sugared poison to make the "medicine go down." Gradually, the dosage is increased. After so many ever-increasing dosages of the same poisons, they become imbued into the organism with an intensity fatal to rational, sensitive, tolerant, non- poisoned minds and hearts. The poisons of indoctrinations do not kill the victim; rather they make him stronger in resistance to the poison.
Those indoctrinations swallowed whole, consumed as part of most people‘s daily diets, make me physically ill. Most of the time, the exposure to them brings on nausea, and sometimes nerve-jangling pains induced by the close-mindedness religions take for granted. Thinking about the poisoning of trusting children's minds frustrates me because others refuse to see it. My mental and physical health are affected and the more aware l am, the more sensitive l become. Yet, l persist, hoping against hope that l can detox those who are suffering.
Would that religions would leave us all alone, especially children, but the believers persist in blithely passing out their poisoned candy treats which l insist I will not eat. (l can't even enjoy birthday, anniversary, get-well cards from them - they always insist of making any occasion a reason for sermonizing.)
Parents who would not give milk to their lactose-intolerant child, or peanuts to a child who would have a violent physical reaction, have no problem allowing strangers to force-feed a B.S.-intolerant child.
Christians, Moslems, and Buddhists killing one another for their faiths, and even generally? No, it’s life in the "hereafter" that they‘re after; that’s what counts: immortal life, which is an oxymoron devaluing life.Those like me, who swallowed the poison which disagreed with our natures, have vomited it up. We see its destructive effects on others, on both those who can and cannot handle it. Good people are being made sick, and remain sick, and they don't understand why. And most of those suffering are being told to increase their dosages!
Even the "nons" are affected, many describing themselves as, "spiritual, not religious," which is buying into some hidden life force radiating in and controlling nature, superior to natural laws. Once again, what are the sacrifices to be made to achieve communion with the superior life forces? This spiritual-not-religious sure sounds like religion in different garments. No, l think those "nons” don't realize just how they are influenced by religions and their downgrading of reality that looks us straight in the eyes, whether we are accepting of it or not.
Interestingly, religions have little use for reality; they create their own, which makes for a rather gloomy assessment of human life in the here and now as compared to the "glorious" future existence they promulgate. Indeed, when religions speak of the "sanctity of life," they are referring to the conception of life, which is why they are anti-abortion, "pro-life," even anti-contraception. They do not appear to give a damn what happens to life after birth. Otherwise how to explain support for the death penalty, and Christians, Moslems, and Buddhists killing one another for their faiths, and even generally? No, it’s life in the "hereafter" that they‘re after; that’s what counts: immortal life, which is an oxymoron devaluing life.
Religions emphasize the "sanctity of life" and "your immortal soul" in regard to "life" before birth and "life" after death. Notice something? There isn’t what you would describe as human life before birth, meaning consciousness, decision-making, awareness of surroundings, or caring about any of those things. And death is a return to a previous state of non-being . The fear of a return to non-being drives religions, which promise an "eternal happiness to an eternal soul," if you merely believe in them. They cannot deliver, but they do offer the poison of hope that cheapens life. Even a little dose can be toxic to your mental health.
Centuries ago, there was a practice of poison-resistance, when a person would consume ever-increasing doses of poison over time, until he could tolerate an amount that would kill another who had not been exposed to the poison. The resistant one could thus poison another without any concern about being poisoned himself, accidentally or intentionally; a sure way to guarantee that the other would die.
Maybe indoctrination works like that. The poisons of indifference to another's sufferings, of intolerance, and acceptance of the irrational, are sneaked in small doses, into the minds of children with a spoonful of sugared poison to make the "medicine go down." Gradually, the dosage is increased. After so many ever-increasing dosages of the same poisons, they become imbued into the organism with an intensity fatal to rational, sensitive, tolerant, non- poisoned minds and hearts. The poisons of indoctrinations do not kill the victim; rather they make him stronger in resistance to the poison.
Those indoctrinations swallowed whole, consumed as part of most people‘s daily diets, make me physically ill. Most of the time, the exposure to them brings on nausea, and sometimes nerve-jangling pains induced by the close-mindedness religions take for granted. Thinking about the poisoning of trusting children's minds frustrates me because others refuse to see it. My mental and physical health are affected and the more aware l am, the more sensitive l become. Yet, l persist, hoping against hope that l can detox those who are suffering.
Would that religions would leave us all alone, especially children, but the believers persist in blithely passing out their poisoned candy treats which l insist I will not eat. (l can't even enjoy birthday, anniversary, get-well cards from them - they always insist of making any occasion a reason for sermonizing.)
Parents who would not give milk to their lactose-intolerant child, or peanuts to a child who would have a violent physical reaction, have no problem allowing strangers to force-feed a B.S.-intolerant child.
Christians, Moslems, and Buddhists killing one another for their faiths, and even generally? No, it’s life in the "hereafter" that they‘re after; that’s what counts: immortal life, which is an oxymoron devaluing life.Those like me, who swallowed the poison which disagreed with our natures, have vomited it up. We see its destructive effects on others, on both those who can and cannot handle it. Good people are being made sick, and remain sick, and they don't understand why. And most of those suffering are being told to increase their dosages!
Even the "nons" are affected, many describing themselves as, "spiritual, not religious," which is buying into some hidden life force radiating in and controlling nature, superior to natural laws. Once again, what are the sacrifices to be made to achieve communion with the superior life forces? This spiritual-not-religious sure sounds like religion in different garments. No, l think those "nons” don't realize just how they are influenced by religions and their downgrading of reality that looks us straight in the eyes, whether we are accepting of it or not.
Interestingly, religions have little use for reality; they create their own, which makes for a rather gloomy assessment of human life in the here and now as compared to the "glorious" future existence they promulgate. Indeed, when religions speak of the "sanctity of life," they are referring to the conception of life, which is why they are anti-abortion, "pro-life," even anti-contraception. They do not appear to give a damn what happens to life after birth. Otherwise how to explain support for the death penalty, and Christians, Moslems, and Buddhists killing one another for their faiths, and even generally? No, it’s life in the "hereafter" that they‘re after; that’s what counts: immortal life, which is an oxymoron devaluing life.
Religions emphasize the "sanctity of life" and "your immortal soul" in regard to "life" before birth and "life" after death. Notice something? There isn’t what you would describe as human life before birth, meaning consciousness, decision-making, awareness of surroundings, or caring about any of those things. And death is a return to a previous state of non-being . The fear of a return to non-being drives religions, which promise an "eternal happiness to an eternal soul," if you merely believe in them. They cannot deliver, but they do offer the poison of hope that cheapens life. Even a little dose can be toxic to your mental health.
Comments
Post a Comment