Category Archives: beliefs

beliefs, ramblings

Four Agreements

A few weeks ago, quite by chance, I came across The Four Agreements.

What are they? Well that depends on who you are and how you view them.

According to Everyday Wisdom they are based on ancient Toltec (an archaeological Mesoamerican culture) wisdom and

offer a powerful code of conduct that can rapidly transform our lives and our work into a new experience of effectiveness, balance and self supporting behaviour.

Everything we do is based on agreements we have made. In these agreements we tell ourselves who we are, what everyone else is, how to act, what is possible and what is impossible. What we have agreed to believe creates what we experience. When these agreements come from fear obstacles develop keeping us from realizing our greatest potential.

According to others they are four principles to practice in order to create love and happiness in your life or for stress management and personal growth.

Yeah OK, that’s what they all say!

What is clear is that they are based on the thinking of Mexican shaman and new age spiritualist Don Miguel Ángel Ruiz and they seem to be the cornerstones of whatever wacknut religious beliefs he holds. They have made him lots of money as he sells “self-help” books about thee agreements by the million.

All of which leaves me feeling very sceptical and mis-trusting.

However when you read the four agreements they do make a lot of sense and they aren’t too far apart from my own personal modus vivendi (see here and here).

Now I don’t propose that anyone goes out and lines Ruiz’s pocket with more money by buying his books. It should be enough to lay out the four agreements and leave you to think about them. They are:

1. Be Impeccable with Your Word
Speak with integrity. Say only what you mean. Avoid using the word to speak against yourself or to gossip about others. Use the power of your word in the direction of truth and love.

2. Don’t Take Anything Personally
Nothing others do is because of you. What others say and do is a projection of their own reality, their own dream. When you are immune to the opinions and actions of others, you won’t be the victim of needless suffering.

3. Don’t Make Assumptions
Find the courage to ask questions and to express what you really want. Communicate with others as clearly as you can to avoid misunderstandings, sadness, and drama. With just this one agreement, you can completely transform your life.

4. Always do Your Best
Your best is going to change from moment to moment; it will be different when you are healthy as opposed to sick. Under any circumstance, simply do your best, and you will avoid self-judgement, self-abuse, and regret.

What’s so special about them? Actually very little. They are pretty much what most belief systems boil down to if you analyse them deeply enough. They can also be pretty damn difficult to adhere to! Not making assumptions is especially hard — the whole of western culture is based upon everyone making assumptions.

Not taking things personally is hard too. I know, from recent experience, that it is all too easy to get upset when someone close reacts emotionally apparently as a result of something you did. But you have to be able to stand back and realise that their emotions are their problem to deal with, not yours, and come from within them. They are not your emotions; you cannot control the other person’s emotions, nor are you responsible for them. Yes that can be hard.

But none of that means the four agreements aren’t worthwhile. Indeed if everyone could just strive towards them society would be a whole bunch better. And you don’t need to believe in some peculiar religious practice to make sense of them; they fit atheists just as well (maybe better?) than they do believers — atheists have no overlying dogma to contend with.

beliefs, current affairs, nudism

Stephen Gough

Interesting press release from British Naturism (BN) on the charade of the Stephen Gough case: Life imprisonment for dressing naturally. They’re right on the money. This is a farce, even if Mr Gough is being wilfully confrontational.

So “life imprisonment” is an over-reaction? No, because apparently a Scottish judge has made it clear that he will continue to be imprisoned until he gives in. Given that everyone agrees he is harmless, that is crazy and obscene treatment. Indeed I could suggest that under the international convention on human rights it amounts to (in the legal phraseology) “cruel and unusual punishment”.

Apart from the fact that Mr Gough clearly has little money, why has this case never been referred to the European Court of Human Rights?

Whether you like nudity or not, the whole affair is a disgrace of the first order.

beliefs, current affairs

Banning Circumcision

1 Comment

So a German court has found a legality upon which to effectively ban the circumcision of baby boys — but only because it leaves doctors open to prosecution on a fairly general charge of “mistreatment”. That at least is the way I read the BBC News report.

My immediate reaction is that this is about time. In my view, as regular readers will know (see here and here), circumcision of boys is as much an abuse as circumcision of girls. It is forcible removal/mutilation when the “victim” is not able (not of an age) to give consent. And at least some parts of the German media agree.

The judgement is right — all protests to the contrary. The circumcision of young boys just for religious reasons is a personal injury. Muslims and Jews should decide themselves — but not before the age of 14.
[Matthias Ruch, FT Deutschland]

The circumcision of Muslim boys is just as heinous as the archaic custom of the genital mutilation of little girls. It is an instrument of oppression and should be outlawed.
[Die Welt]

Unfortunately because of the niceties of the case the judgement is not open to being tested in a higher court. That’s shame because such a legal precedent should be tested. So German medics are left in limbo: unable to perform the operation (unless, one assumes, as a medical necessity, which is rare) for fear of prosecution but unable to test the validity of the precedent. Highly unsatisfactory.

Needless to say both the Jewish and Muslim communities are up in arms. At least the German Muslim leader who is quoted in the BBC report is being sensible: I do not want my people to (have to) go abroad and/or to backstreet surgeons to have this done; I would prefer it done under proper medical supervision. The Rabbis quoted seem to be able to say nothing except wail “we’ve always done it this way” and “it’s our right”. Hmmph.

German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, appears to be of the opinion that circumcision is a part of freedom to practice religion. I disagree, and not because I am areligious. In my book no religion (no person) should be able to mutilate someone who is unable to freely give informed consent. If any religion chopped off the left hand, fingers or nose of every baby boy (or girl) this would soon be outlawed, as it would if the children were permanently tattooed at a few days old with a cross in the middle of their forehead. After all the Baptists were established (as antipaedobaptists) precisely because they were opposed to infant baptism when the child was unable to give consent.

But where does one draw the line? Should parents be prohibited from cutting a child’s fingernails or hair on the grounds that this is abuse? Probably not as these regrow; foreskins don’t, just as female genitals don’t regrow nor scarification scars heal fully. That seems, at least on the face of it, to be a sensible test and place to draw the line.

Medical necessity excepted, of course, which is legally testable if necessary.

While I don’t like the way this has been done, I think the German decision is the right one.

beliefs, ramblings

Cross Spotters

1 Comment

Oh dear! The Christians are fluttering in their olive trees again. Various clerics, most notably Cardinal O’Brien, Roman Orthodox Archbishop of all Scotland, are telling their flocks to wear a cross to signify their faith.

Why? Why do they have to be told? Are they sheep? [No, don’t answer that!]

And why do they need to do this? I don’t give a flying wombat what fictions you believe. I’m glad to say that’s your problem, not mine.

And yet most true believers already wear their faith on their sleeves and — very rudely — make sure we’re not allowed to forget it. But sure, if they want to wear an emblem, why shouldn’t they?** Who is to stop them going around adorned with badges and looking like a bus spotter? Moreover I’m sure the monasteries could find enough spare saints’ fingers for them all to have a few poking out of a breast pocket to complete the bus spotter look. The same applies to believers in any other faith, or no faith.

Most of us don’t need to advertise our beliefs on our lapels. But if others are sufficiently insecure in their faith that they have to remind everyone, including themselves, what harm? None really if they stick to just wearing a badge. But I bet they don’t. The harm is if, as so often, it becomes another nauseating means of proselytising beliefs. That’s something the rest of us have no need to do; indeed don’t believe in doing. We’re secure enough in our beliefs; beliefs which are personal and not to be imposed on others. We don’t need lots of other like-minded fools around us to convince us we’re right.

Yes, OK, fine if you want to wear a discrete cross, pentacle, Star of David, swastika or whatever on a chain round your neck. But is it just me who finds badges, bumper stickers, prayer beads hanging from driving mirrors etc. somewhat nauseating? And I don’t draw the line at religious symbolism. Badges for the Rotary Club, football club, train spotters guild are just as annoying. Why do we need to advertise our allegiances in this way? If we can’t spread our faith (whatever that is) by shining example then pretty poor show. Good works and humility, not faith alone.

Who are we to deny such poor benighted souls their comforts? Although can you imagine the outcry if they were forced to wear some identification, as were the Jews in Nazi Germany? They’d be up in arms quicker than a ferret down a drain-pipe.

Maybe I should have a supply of “There is no god” badges made? Or should we all have 42 forceably tattooed on our foreheads?

** There will always be employers who, rightly, ban jewellery for safety reasons. But that is really a side issue.

beliefs, current affairs, ramblings

Marriage

There’s recently been a lot of brouhaha over the UK government’s suggestion of making marriage available to (male and female) homosexual couples.

The Christian churches are up in arms because they see it as devaluing (or worse) the sacrament of marriage.

Put plainly, this is bollox.

Neither the church, nor any other religion, owns marriage. Arguably it may have done once, in the days before developed civil government, but no longer. In almost every civilised country there is a civil marriage option available as well as a religious one. The churches may have a ceremony which they call marriage. This does not mean they own the concept or the sole rights, although it does give them the right to choose who to allow to partake in their ceremony.

A heterosexual couple can have a civil marriage, so why can’t a homosexual couple? No-one is suggesting that the churches have to be a part of this if they wish not to. They are not to be obliged to marry homosexual couples and indeed they may choose (as they do now) who can marry under their aegis. Many heterosexual couples are denied a religious marriage for a whole variety of reasons.

And of course no couple has to marry or enter into any officially sanctioned partnership arrangement. And quite right too. So a coach and horses has already been driven through marraige as originally conceived by the churches.

I fail to see a problem.

There are couples who will choose a civil marriage and couples who will choose a religious marriage. Civil marriage will be available to all; religious marriage will only be available to those who can jump some arbitrary set of church defined hurdles. Just as now.

And come couples will choose to ignore the whole idea of marriage (by whatever name) and just live together. Horses for courses, and all that.

No change, really, except that the civil marriage net is being widened.

Although there is the suggestion of an anomaly with civil partnerships. As gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has pointed out the current proposals now discriminate against heterosexuals by allowing same-sex couples the option of marriage or civil partnerships but only marriage for heterosexual couples. Which is ludicrous!

I see no purpose in continuing with the civil partnership sham. Let’s drop it altogether and have just civil marriages. Either that or we have to keep both civil partnerships and civil marriages for all.

Or of course we could just ban marriage altogether — for everyone.

For other sane views you might like to read Betty Herbert’s blog, John Bingham in the Daily Telegraph and Marie Jackson on BBC News.

beliefs, nudism

What's so Shocking about Breasts?

BBC TV Breakfast presenter Susanna Reid has accused viewers of over-reacting to sightings of her cleavage.

Oh FFS! What’s so shocking about breasts? Even whole breasts, let alone glimpses round the edge?

Answer: Nothing!

Women have breasts. So do men. Women’s breasts are multi-functional. Men’s aren’t. Men are allowed to show theirs. Women aren’t. How is this logic? Where is the problem?

Answer: In your mind!

Who cares whether the breasts in question are on TV, at the supermarket, in my front room, or on the beach? Why should that make any difference?

We all know, give or take the odd interesting scar, what’s under these pieces of fabric we call clothes. So how does it matter if the fabric isn’t there? If everyone was naked, wouldn’t we find it obscene that people wanted to cover themselves up?

Come on people, get a life! Bodies and nudity are normal. They aren’t de facto sexual, or criminal, or dirty, or “not nice” — except in your mind. Try getting real and getting comfortable with bodies; try being body and sex positive for once. Try adjusting your mind.

Yes, it’ll change your outlook on life — for the better. And who knows, you might actually like it!

And remember: If you see anything God didn’t make, throw a brick at it!

Good call, Susanna!

beliefs, current affairs

Logic? What Logic?

2 Comments

Reports and comment on two recent pieces of appalling logic.

Firstly on the Roman Catholic Church’s stance on same sex marriage: Cardinal Sins against Logic. What can one do but agree with one commenter who says There is no such thing as ‘a great theological mind’. The term is an oxymoron.

And secondly on the attitude of some American mothers towards other teenage girls taking the Pill: All Kinds of Weapons.

Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!

beliefs, nudism


If you’re interested in nudism, need your mind expanding or have kids with body image hang-ups (ie. most teenagers) this should be worth watching.

My Daughter the Teenage Nudist
Channel 4; Thursday 12 January; 10pm
Filmed in collaboration with British Naturism

beliefs, food+drink

Wassail!

Tonight is Twelfth Night. According to the OED Twelfth Night is the evening of the fifth of January, preceding Twelfth Day, the eve of the Epiphany; this was formerly the last day of the Christmas festivities and observed as a time of merrymaking. This is predicated on the medieval custom of starting each new day at sunset, so that Twelfth Night precedes Twelfth Day Which would be Epiphany, 6 January).

Tradition has it that if you don’t take your Christmas decorations down by Twelfth Night they have to stay up all year or you bring bad luck upon yourself. Although there does seem to be a “lease break” at Candlemas (2 February).

In many parts of England, especially the southern cider-making counties, one of the Twelfth Night traditions is Wassailing the apple trees to ensure a good crop the following autumn. In fact the term Wassail, by association, has at least there uses: the celebration of the apple trees, the hot mulled punch which is drunk at such occasions, and as a toast. All derive from the Middle English wæs hæl, meaning literally “good health”. To quote Wikipedia:

In the cider-producing counties […] wassailing refers to a traditional ceremony that involves singing and drinking the health of trees in the hopes that they might better thrive. The purpose of wassailing is to awake the cider apple trees and to scare away evil spirits to ensure a good harvest of fruit in the Autumn. The ceremonies of each wassail vary from village to village but they generally all have the same core elements. A wassail King and Queen lead the song and/or a processional tune to be played/sung from one orchard to the next, the wassail Queen will then be lifted up into the boughs of the tree where she will place toast soaked in Wassail […] as a gift to the tree spirits […] an incantation is usually recited […]

The words of the incantation and any associated carol(s) vary, for instance there is:

Here’s to thee, old apple-tree,
Whence thou mayst bud, and whence thou mayst blow,
And whence thou mayst bear apples enow!
Hats-full! Caps-full!
Bushel, bushel sacks-full!
And my pockets full, too! Hurra!

The one I prefer is the ancient Gloucetershire Wassail which begins

Wassail! wassail! all over the town,
Our toast it is white and our ale it is brown;
Our bowl it is made of the white maple tree;
With the wassailing bowl, we’ll drink to thee.

There’s also this Wassail carol, which is more often these days sung as a Christmas carol (which it never was!):

Here we come a wassailing among the leaves so green
Here we come a wandering so fair to be seen
Love and joy come to you and to your wassail too
And the Gods bless you and send you a happy New Year
And the Gods send you a happy New Year
We are not daily beggars that beg from door to door
We are your neighbour’s children whom you have seen before
The Gods bless the master of this house, likewise the mistress, too
And all the little children that round the table go.

Needless to say the details vary from place to place. The Wassail punch may be cider, beer, wine or mead based. As one is thanking and encouraging the apple trees my gut feel is that the punch should be either cider based or contain apple in some other form. I also recall that some traditions use cake rather then toast and some have bonfires. You can also indulge in making a lot of noise (like banging on tin buckets, blowing horns etc.) in order to drive away the evil spirits.

So if you want to go out tonight and wassail your apple tree(s) then as long as you stick to these rough principles, and don’t drink all the punch before the apple trees have their share, you don’t seem to be able to go far wrong. Just remember that if you want to dance round the tree as well, you’d better go deosil (clockwise) but as it is a few days away from full moon you will probably be excused doing so sky-clad — although there is nothing saying you can’t should you wish!

Wassail!