There has been a lot of talk recently, in our delightfully secular society, about the legalization of one of the world’s oldest forms of introspective perversion; Christianity.
Prior to entering the discussion on the legalization of Christianity, however, we should discuss how we got to this point.
Indeed, gone are the days when religion covertly pulled the strings of leverage behind the political machine, and less covertly, as priests, pastors and clerics told their congregations exactly who they would vote for, whilst demonizing the opposition.
Religion, as you may recall, was effectively neutered in the public sphere following the landmark study by a coalition of the world’s finest universities, which linked public declarations of religious belief to the astoundingly rapid decline in economic performance, intelligence quotients and breathable air.
After all, as the study found, “why would you care about the air or economy of tomorrow when your respective deity, penned in your respective holy book, expressly told you that the world is yours to do as you please?”
The study also found the following on intelligence, “when you’re taught from childhood that it is more important to believe in supernatural feats in direct spite of contrary evidence, than to trust in the empirical findings of scientific egg-heads, and subsequently punished for doubting the lack of evidence for human propagation from two white individuals in a garden, why study?”
Rather astoundingly, the level of ignorance towards scientific consensus was so prevalent at one point that the then Republican Party (and many ‘socially conservative political parties around the world) was made up, almost entirely, of individuals who believed that the fact of climate change was “just a myth”. This same group of people sought to remove the reproductive rights of women, forcing them to give birth to children they didn’t want – many of whom ended up in orphanages – whilst simultaneously stifling any attempt to promote sex education in schools and the use of condoms.
You may also remember the occasion where the Pope, a man who had personally enabled child abuse, entered Africa, a continent ravaged by sexually transmitted diseases, and told the people that condoms, which have an efficacy of preventing STIs above 98%, should not be used.
The final and some say the most salient finding of the study, uncovered a startling fact which we all now hold to be ‘common sense’ – “religion is responsible for the degradation of society, of morals and will lead to the ultimate destruction of humanity.”
Immediately upon the release, the governments who had not been effected by the degradation of intelligence began imposing laws to counter the overwhelming problem. Among them;
- All public policy was required to have empirical evidence supporting it;
- All schools were required to teach fact based curriculum, including a thorough reproductive and sexual education component;
- It was made illegal for religious instruction to take place prior to the age of 21, when the adult could critically analyze the claims;
- All religious institutions were taxed as the corporations they were found to be;
- All public declarations of belief, prayer and superstition based holidays were replaced with public appreciation of science, fundraising for medical research and government sanctioned family days.
The most important policy, as you may recall, was that religions be treated as the blight that they apparently were. Immediately, adherents in left their religion in droves, many exclaiming, “I was taught that being non-religious meant that you’d go to hell, but it turns out that the teaching and hell were just convenient lies to keep me in the pews.”
Of course, religion was not outlawed altogether, and people were welcome to their beliefs, regardless of how ridiculous they happened to be. As such, religion and loose ambivalent belief in ‘something’ remained in the public consciousness, but not in public. Belief became private and disorganized; for one’s own confidential philosophical musings, rather than for public display.
Now to the current problem facing society.
For some time now, the remaining adherents of Christianity have been segregating themselves from the greater society; succeeding from their countries of birth to form pseudo-nations called Christian Nations of Christianity. Here, they can publicly believe in their religion and teach their children what they call “Truth”, despite the actual presence of any truth. As a result of their separation and beliefs, however, they are not allowed to make any policy or actions which would affect anyone outside of their Nations.
Now, due to the spiraling rate of Christian on Christian crime – which incidentally proves the old adage that “belief in god ain’t ever stopped no one from murderin’” – the annexed Christians want to rejoin the countries that their forefathers left behind.
While our secular societies are objectively more accepting than the previous quasi and semi-secular societies, critics fear that it will, inevitably lead to mixed marriages between secularists and Christians, forcing a reinterpretation of the marriage acts.
What critics really fear, however, is that the defectors of the Christian Nations of Christians will have children in our secular nations, and be thereby legally able to run for politics. These “anchor babies” could indeed lead to a reformation of nonsensical values which our society did away with, long, long ago.
This reporter worries that given the Christian Nations of Christians’ focus on maintaining wealth for the wealthy at the expense of education and healthcare for the lower classes as sited in their policy entitled, “making the well off feel more comfortable”, the defectors would quickly become a burden on society. Their propensity to forego fact in place of faith means that their relative education levels would make them suitable for menial tasks, i.e. the jobs reserved for helping reformed prisoners reintegrate to the greater society.
What do you think? Should Christianity be again legalized in our prosperous secular societies?
