Skip to main content

Laughing Free

By Carl S ~

Does the word “dogmatic” tell us something about comedy? Well, interestingly, the dictionary defines the meaning of dogmatic as, “marked by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved principles.” Oy vay! Is this not an open invitation for ridicule and satire? Consider that the word derives from “dogma.” Do you see why religions, with their unwavering insistence on following their own chosen scriptural texts in their own rigid interpretations, outlawing all others, would be threatened by any others? You can see how they would have a rough time competing against free speech. And why they suppressed it for thousands of years.

In the public marketplace religion is free to advertise and sell itself. But, religions find themselves competing with popular culture and information which threaten its traditional powers. Ergo, sects steal and borrow and copy from them for their own advertising and sales pitches. In the public marketplace, anything and anyone is open to commentary, ridicule, even condemnation; even faith and religious spokesmen. Fortunately, we have a veritable cornucopia of ridiculous claims and beliefs available for such things. Even ordinary believers are seeing and hearing just how stupid and insensitive their spokesmen can be; not only by their words, but actions. There is a necessity for ridicule to emphasize these facts.

Humor has the unmitigated gall to go where the territory is forbidden, to tiptoe over the threshold of religious intolerance, to cast the spotlights of ridicule on the ridiculous and arrogant. Parody, satire, and blasphemy enable us to see different points of view from the dogmatic. They enable us to accept, loosen up, and relax the rigidity and inflexible prejudices and self-delusions religious faith depends on. Humor tells us not to take ourselves too seriously.

Humor, in short, means accepting being human. It means that the person who can laugh at himself/herself is confident, sane, unthreatened by differences of opinion. Comedy brings not only different points of view, but expresses, like greeting cards, sentiments and thoughts which are unspoken, even forbidden, in society. (And condemned in houses of worship.) Emotions and words are assumed in comedy which would be ordinarily hidden behind the curtain. Comedy can be a sneaky way to get people to think and accept, while laughing.

Religion teaches and encourages taking the ridiculous seriously. Yes it does. Ergo, religions are insulted and threatened by what they see as challenges to their claims. Think about this though. Actually, “irreverent” has become acceptable as legitimate comedy; i.e., normal. Irreverent is laughing at silly beliefs, silly authoritarian claims. Doesn't that indicate taking silly things seriously is abnormal? And haven‘t we all noticed how the most rigid, whose “minds are made up,” have changed their minds due to the influence of comedy?

Comedy, ridicule, satire, blasphemy, whatever flavor you choose, makes for freedom of thought, of feelings, of tolerance, and acceptance of the human condition. (Gloria Steinem made the observation: “The truth shall set you free; but first it will piss you off”) Some examples: “The Producers” movie and stage musical which ridicules Hitler. “Hogan’s Heroes” ridiculing the Nazis. The comic strip “Jesus and Moe,” satiric commentaries on you-know-who. “The Life of Brian,” a satire on the life of Jesus. The movie, “The Ruling Class,” and Brit comedies such as “The Vicar of Dibley,” mocking the hypocrisies, fallibilities, and foibles of clergy. Also, Philip Appleman's masterful “Perfidious Proverbs” - a whole different way of looking at biblical texts and beliefs. (And very liberating.)

Blasphemy has the potential to change the unchangeable by giving good swift kicks to complacent and comfortable butts. Blasphemy can make you wonder. Since the satirist or blasphemer offers alternative stories and interpretations to what is traditionally accepted, perhaps those originals are themselves mere interpretations, equally silly. Especially if the alternatives make more sense than the originals.

Blasphemy considers how a young drunk teen girl can get knocked up and then turn around and convince a gullible yokel that some spirit made her pregnant. Imagine the silliness of that! For centuries, women, finding themselves pregnant, have gone through the trouble and risks of seducing men into copulation so that they wouldn't be banished from society and would have someone to help raise the kid. This is a funny tale and Joseph takes first prize in the Wus contest. Compare this to the deep theological debates about whether Adam and Eve had belly buttons, of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, or if there is work or not in heaven. Think about the tragic absurdity befalling a man who goes around pissing off the authorities (who, by the way, he replaced with even worse hypocrites than he criticized), taking it to such extremes that they ended up crucifying him. (“Gee, couldn't they take a joke?”)

Speaking of which, obviously, the preponderance of scriptures and sects proves that those texts are open to different and varied translations and interpretations. Even to the possibility that the writers and interpreters are deceivers. The Religious Right have no tolerance for blasphemy or ridicule about their authoritative, arrogant assertions. Tyrants have no sense of humor concerning their character. Satire makes tyranny tremble. We look to leaders who don‘t take themselves too seriously.

Laughter is healthy; it is said that humans are the only animals that laugh (or need to). Very serious philosophers have mentioned that life is absurd. A cosmic joke. Perhaps it is. After all, considering the trauma of birth and struggles to survive and prosper, not to mention the sorrows and disappointments all along the way, there isn't a whole lot of joy and happiness except what we make ourselves. And it all ends, for everyone and everything, in death and nothingness. It all does seem like a trickster’s practical joke. Some of us can't help but laugh at this folly. There is a freedom to this kind of reality acceptance. But, I think that non-believers need to find a way to mock themselves, too. Self mockery disarms the critics.

Thanks for reading this. Hope you had a few laughs and thoughts. Oh gee, did I forget to mention Hissie the Talking Snake? Quite a tempting fellow, or girl - who could tell the difference, even Noah? Did Hissie speak Hebrew or Latin or Esperanto (or Lisperanto)? Ask your local god expert. You may make him free. But first, you'll piss him off.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two