Giving Thanks

I might not have the world's most interesting job, but I do work for the Americans, and as such, get US holidays as well as French. So today, being Thanksgiving, I was off work - hurrah!

Actually, I think the British should celebrate Thanksgiving too. We could give thanks that all the lunatics who wanted to set up a fundamentalist religious state felt obliged to bugger off and do it elsewhere. The rest of the population were thus left in peace and able to enjoy themselves.

The legacy of their departure is still with us. You just have to look at the nuttier elements of American society, of which there is a sizeable number, to be thankful that they are not still on British shores being really annoying and not loving their neighbour at all unless he thinks in exactly the same way them.

Religious fundamentalists of all persuasions are equally painful. As one guy on a comment form put it recently, "they should get their own planet". Unfortunately, most can't keep themselves to themselves because they do like to interfere in the lives of everyone else - spreading the word, and warning of imminent destruction and a horrid afterlife watching daytime tv on repeat.

Life would be so much pleasanter if everyone abided by the maxim "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Just think of the trouble it would save if those on a nutty religious mission out to make nuisances of themselves just stopped to think if they would like it done to them. "Would I like to be blown up, cut to pieces, strung up, given the third degree, subjected to an Inquisition, raped, sacked or pillaged?" they need only ask of themselves. The answer, in all probability being "er, no" would mean they would all go home, put the kettle on and find something better to do with their excess energies, like playing frisbee with their kids for example.

Believing in a higher being does not oblige one to be religious. Religion is the opium of the masses, as we all know, having been created usually for the greater comfort of men. It's funny how women always come off worse in religions, being expected to be the 'little woman' and deferring to her 'better half' just because he's got an extra appendage and a few more muscles.

Add in copious quantities of guilt and not much fun and it's amazing how anyone falls for it. Mind you, it can be hugely entertaining too. My favourites are the Creationists who believe the world is only 4400yrs old, or is it 6000; it may have gone up... They staunchly, fervently even, deny any aspect of science that not only questions this but actually contradicts it, such as carbon dating. I must say, I'd love to be able to brainwash otherwise intelligent minds with such success.

What would I do with my new-found power? I'd instil in everyone the importance of doing unto others what they would have them do to you, and reminding them that moderation is best for most things which are fun (eating crisps, alcohol, playing video games, gambling, etc.) or even not so fun, like working. Religious nutters would be blasted off to discover Mars and asked nicely not to come back.

If only!

Thesis

I'm thinking of writing a thesis, and wondering who I can ask for funding. Ooooh, I can hear you thinking, that sounds scholarly and well-organised...

You'd be right too, except that it might be a bit difficult getting it off the ground, especially when you hear the title... "The influence of The Flintstones on American religious culture". You may laugh, but it seems that watching the programme in early childhood has left an interesting dinosaur print (as it were) on the minds of impressionable American kiddies.

You may or may not have heard of the Creationist Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, where model dinosaurs are cosily situated in scenes including humans. Science would have us believe that 60million years separate the demise of the dinosaurs from the rise of Man, but what would science know compared to the Bible?! The Museum illustrates the refusal of Creationists to accept the geological age of the earth and I'm sure this is because they have been so deeply affected by the depiction of dinosaurs and humans together in The Flintstones.

Obviously it's far more fun to believe in the stone foot-powered cars and comfy caves with a dino dog especially as the Bible doesn't actually refer to dinosaurs by name or inference, so why not? As we know dinosaur skeletons exist, but that the earth was created "a few thousand years ago", it stands to reason that the dinosaurs had to be around when God was creating snakes and pigeons... and, I suppose, amoebae.

In case you're wondering how Noah got all those massive reptiles onto the Ark, he took babies, or eggs... (I knew you'd be worrying about the logistics) according to the people behind the Museum, Answers in Genesis. These are the people who are most likely to have been Flintstone fanatics. I'd bet my bottom euro that they can name all the characters, and most of the storylines off by heart. So entrenched are they in the Flintstone culture, that they wanted to prove to the world that it was real, and how better than by taking the Bible and working Flintstone culture into Genesis.

Having a little idea that God was supposed to have made the earth and everything in it, it seemed like a good opportunity to bung dinosaurs in with the rest and have them live alongside Adam and Eve, the snake, their children, their children's children, Noah, sheep, cockroaches, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all... Being mostly vegetarian, despite their huge jaws and needle sharp teeth, they would of course have been available to take in as pets, trained to fetch the 'paper' and act as guard dinos.

How anyone could accept this drivel, let alone finance a $25million museum defies belief, and I am concerned how many Americans have the gall to accuse others of religious fanaticism when their own home-grown variety is every bit as fanatical. What is certain is that they not going to sit at home with their mouths shut once they feel powerful enough to take on the Establishment, which is exactly what will happen when all those home-schooled brain-washed mites grow up and enter mainstream politics.

Yabbadabba-doooooo!

(Funding? Yes...No?)

Can't Stop Progress

It goes without saying that my parents only have to arrive for the heavens to open promising a week's worth of downpours for the duration of their stay. Today they were shower-hopping buying bread, and were denied watching my youngest play footie as it was too wet.

So much for languidly reclining on the sunbed a book in one hand, a freshly squeezed orange juice in the other, their only worry whether the suntan lotion needs topping up. The height of today's excitement was not finding limon cello in Intermarche, and buying a Norma plastic bag. Living on the edge!

Meanwhile the art auction preparations by Promo'Arts continue unabated, except for the May 1 bank holiday, general April 30 pont and weekend apathy by 99.9% of the population. May is not a good month for being dynamic. You are likely to be the only one at it if you are. However, it's best not to rock the boat as the status quo is a very important element of French life. It'll be interesting to see who gets to be president on Sunday, and whether whoever is chosen actually gets to upset the status quo.

The Creationist status quo is likely to be upset in the coming months with the experiments being carried out by the Large Hadron Collider which being built in Geneva at the moment. It hopes to recreate the conditions right after the big bang and solve the mystery of the Higgs Boson particle which explains how fundamental particles acquire mass. The Horizon programme on BBC2 last night did a fantastic job presenting the research and some of the historical lead-up. I would be most interested to hear how crazy Creationists could explain the discoveries that have been made over the last 40 years and are continuing to help scientists understand the realities of the Big Bang; discoveries that go beyond Creationist thinking of 'oh, it's far too complicated for us to understand so God must have dunnit'.

The status quo is a very cosy place to inhabit, but it's anti-progress. France is on the edge of an opportunity to right the problems that will not go away if the voters choose the status quo. Voting is a first step; the second, more important is not to sabotage the efforts made by those who have been voted in by taking to the streets and refusing change.

Creationists will soon be confronted by possible proof of the making of stuff. Will they go with progress or ignore it?

Me? I'm just hoping it stops raining and that we find some limon cello for my dad. I can't vote and I'm not a crazy Creationist, but I love progress!

Girls just wanna have fun...

When I think back to my childhood compared to what is happening today I am relieved in many ways to have grown up in the sixties and seventies. I lived in a little cul-de-sac road of new houses full of young families who provided instant friends to play with, fight, compete against and interact with. Most of this went on outside in the road which was free of cars for much of the day as people only had one car per family and that was used by the head of the house to go to work.

We didn't have the fantastically creative opportunities of digital cameras, YouTube, or computers but we could play without fear of being abducted, run over or generally aggressed unless we were doing something wrong (like building hay fortresses in the farmer's field...).

I hated dolls, including Barbie, but loved my (all male) teddies, my scooter, pedal go-kart, brother's bike, and push-along donkey. I would have hated Bratz dolls too had they been sold then. When I saw them for the first time I couldn't believe how such brazenly sluttish dolls could be sold to little girls. I couldn't understand how parents could possibly accept that such plastic hookers be a suitable present for impressionable minds.

My opinion of these dolls has since been borne out by a report cited in the Telegraph today. A group of leading psychologist are warning parents about the corrupting influence of such dolls which project girls into inappropriate sexualisation. Clothes for little girls have also become overtly sexy and their magazines are a far cry from the ones I came across in my youth, including 'Jackie' which, I thought at the age of 15, was already very progressive!

It never ceases to amaze me how stupid so many parents are. Why do they allow their daughters to dress like hookers, play with doll hookers and read magazines that tell little girls how to dress and act like hookers? Don't they realise that this is damaging for young minds? Should we be surprised at the rise in underage sex when childhood is being so corrupted?

I am relieved to have boys who, whilst they may be noisy and boisterous, do not have a desire to look like pimps, play with pimp action figures or read magazines promoting pimping. Girls these days are definitely a different kettle of fish!

Talking of which, the ResidentAdo comes back to France tomorrow after spending two weeks with her mother. Modern day adolescence is also a phenomenon which horrifies me - jeans that barely cover pubes, shorts so short they should only be worn in the bedroom and an attitude of demanding independence without responsibility. Basically it boils down to 'I want to do as I like and I want you to run around enabling me to do as I like, and paying for it'. Teenagers have probably always had this attitude, but strong parenting protected them from themselves. The fear now is that parents have lost control, kids are out of control and God help the future. They just had to say 'no'.

My only consolation is that, as with all extreme situations, there will be a backlash, unless it's too late, in which case future adults will have no solid foundations on which to base their stronger stance and could deviate off into fanaticism. Cue those Creationists. They are standing in the wings ready to fly to the rescue of those lost souls who'll be searching for answers.

Streuth, I'm glad I'll be too old to care by then.

Would you Adam & Eve it?

It would appear that a creationist museum will open in Kentucky, showing dinosaurs frolicking with Adam and Eve. The Bible, apparently is the true word of God, presumably sent down by a heavenly version of texting seeing as there have always been arguments as to the exact nature of the translation of the Bible. You would think that God, in His infinite wisdom, would be multi-lingual and send down versions with simultaneous translation thus sparing scholars much pedantic discussion.

What intrigues me is why the Bible is the Ultimate Source of creation. Why not some other holy book? What's so indisputably certain about the Bible? If evolution did not occur at all, what colour were Adam and Eve, and how come we have morphologically different men and women in different parts of the globe? Didn't they evolve along with their climatic circumstances? If humans evolved thus, why didn't any other evolution occur?

Why is it that just because some folks cannot understand how cells evolved in different ways that they didn't do this? Hey, I don't understand how people solve maths problems about trains travelling at certain miles per hour, but I would never dream of suggesting that those who can are crazy and delusional.

Creationism is cosy, yes, but that doesn't mean it's True. It just seems to be based on 'I don't understand how evolution could happen, therefore it ain't true'.

What tickles me most is that the creationist museum curators will have nothing to do with Intelligent Design which is Creationism without the crazy literal Bible element. They still have the 'I don't understand anything so it can't be true thinking', of course.

Ah, religion. I wonder what Buddhists think. Who created their universe?