If you are religious, don't read this post
Mood:  sharp
Now Playing: Pain - Stereomud
Topic: Sacrelicious

I am not exactly a Napoleon Bonaparte ‘rah-rah’ kind of fan, because I’m not pro-war and he was Mr. Conquer Europe, but I saw something last night that pointed out an idea of his I truly liked.

 

Napoleon was against theocracy. He was against the Inquisition and the rule of the Catholic Church. He tore down the walls of the Jewish ghettos and granted civil rights to the Jewish people in the lands he conquered (Northern Italy, Spain, etc) who were oppressed by the Holy C. Yes, I was watching PBS last night. I could not believe I was actually in front of the TV set, and after dusting off the remote control, I found myself at PBS of course. Hoping for something light such as Antique Road Show I became engrossed in a documentary on the Inquisition.

 

If I was dead set against the Catholic Church already (my entire family is either extremely Catholic or members of the Orthodox Armenian Church), this documentary went further than anything I have ever read to make me firm my resolve against the papacy.

 

Anyway, Napoleon had the right idea with regards to the separation of Church and State.

 

Christians – prepare to be offended -

 

Biblical laws should not be used as the laws to run a government that rules over a diverse group of people from varying religions. They are exclusionary, chauvinistic, and in many cases barbaric.

 

Here is my issue. If what I do is a sin in your eyes, and you believe I will go to hell for it, and my soul will be damned for it, then, I will be punished and judged by your God’s laws. That does not mean you have the right to judge me in this life. That does not mean that you have the right to stop me from living my life. Let me be a sinner and be done with it. I am not asking you to save me and I am specifically telling you to not try. I am not asking for your approval, because you do not have the right to approve or disapprove of my morality because yours is not superior to mine. I do not need you to impose your beliefs on me.

 

Besides all of that, you are hypocrites. Should we enforce all the laws of the Biblical cannon, you all would be condemned over and over again. Some examples:

 

 Leviticus 18:19 “And you must not come near a woman during the menstruation of her impurity to lay her nakedness bare.” Okay, then, has every Christian or Jewish man slept in another bed away from his wife every time she was on her period and abstained from sexual intercourse at that time as well? If you haven’t, you’re a sinner and in violation of God’s laws. 

Leviticus 18:20 “ You must not give your emission as semen to the wife of your associate to become unclean by it.” Okay, then, every man who has donated sperm is a sinner, and every woman who has taken a sperm donation for the use of getting pregnant without intercourse, is a sinner. 

How about –

 Leviticus 19: 9 & 10 “And when YOU people reap the harvest of YOUR land, you must not reap the edge of your field completely, and the gleaning of your harvest you must not pick up. Also, you must not gather the leftovers of your vineyard, and you must not pick up the scattered grapes of your vineyard. For the afflicted one and the alien resident you should leave them." Okay, then, every farmer who hasn't given the left over of his harvest to the crippled and to immigrants for free is a sinner.

Leviticus 19: 19 "YOU people should keep my statutes: You must not interbreed your domestic animals of two sorts. You must not sow your field with seeds of two sorts, and you must not put upon yourself a garment of two sorts of thread, mixed together." Okay, all of you who have muts you adopted from the pound that you've bred, you're sinners. Or, if you allowed cross breeding, you're a sinner. Oh, and all of those not wearing 100% silk, or cotton, something that isn't a blend, then, you're a sinner.

Need I go on? I tried to pick some of the least offensive of the laws I could. Oh, and the argument that Jesus was the fulfillment of the cannon, and now you need only live by the new convenient of love thy neighbor, then, well, love me and stop telling me what to do.

OR, if all those laws still exist, and Jesus died for my sins, then he was the Substitutionary Sacrifice, and that should be enough.

Way too serious a blog for me
Mood:  sharp
Now Playing: Carmina Burana by Orff
Topic: Sacrelicious

When I was younger – I am talking like when I was age 10 - 17, I was fairly religious and pretty conservative. I believed in freedom so long as it conformed to Jehovah’s guidelines as set forth in the scared texts of the Bible. I was firmly a creationist, did not believe in a woman’s right to choose, and was not very accepting of the idea of homosexual relationships. I can admit that I let my personal religious beliefs dictate my world view on what other people should or should not be doing in their daily lives – their personal daily lives. Then, my eyes were opened by a series of personal events that caused me to reevaluate my belief structure.

 

The Massacre in Tiananmen Square in China opened my eyes. How could a government hate its people so much as to run them over with tanks and shoot them when all they wanted was freedom? That is what was running through my mind. I was thankful that I lived in a country where I was free. I started to evaluate my freedoms and I realized I took a great deal of them for granted. My mother had talked to me about the Civil Rights movement and the Women’s Liberation movement, but I really didn’t “get it” until I saw that poor Chinese man stand in front of tank, stand up and say, “We are not going to take this anymore” and they killed him and a host of other protesters. Why? What For? Was all this because Communist leader Deng Xiaoping wanted to shore up his leadership? It was a peaceful mass protest, and the Chinese government’s response was violent and brutal. Yes, June 4, 1989 affected me greatly. It led me to some deep soul searching. Who are we to deny others the right to choose they way in which they want to spend their precious hours on this marvelous creation Earth?

 

Other things happened in 1989 and 1990 that shaped my view of our government and society in general.

 

Reagan left office and the first Bush presidency began. Things just did not seem to be going in a good direction for the country. Bush was out of touch with the American people, and he just seemed ‘smarmy’ to me. Not long after he took over the reigns from Reagan, the whole Iran-Contra affair was wrapped up with a US jury convicted Oliver North. I wondered why Bush and Reagan didn’t get something done to them. It didn’t seem fair. This secret arrangement in the 1980s to provide funds to the Nicaraguan contra rebels from profits gained by selling arms to Iran was just a terrible thing for the Republican administration to do. The Iran-contra affair was the product of two separate initiatives during the administration of President Ronald Reagan. The first was a commitment to aid the contras who were conducting a guerrilla war against the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. The second was to placate “moderates” within the Iranian government in order to secure the release of American hostages held by pro-Iranian groups in Lebanon and to influence Iranian foreign policy in a pro-Western direction. I wasn’t too thrilled when just over a year latter Oliver North’s conviction was overturned on appeal. It just didn’t feel like justice.

 

I remember very clearly when I heard about Salman Rushdie being condemned to death by Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini because he wrote Satanic Versus, and then just a short time later Khomeini dying. I never liked Khomeini because of the entire mess with the hostages in Iran, and I didn’t get why this guy had so much power. It got me interested in WHY he was in charge of Iran (as I understood it at age 17), and I found out he was a cleric – yeah, a holy man. Something like a priest or rabbi, or congregational elder but on an entirely more powerful level, because he told people how to live their lives and made it the country’s law. He made Islamic law the law of the land in Iran and when I found out about how they treated women – OH MY GOODNESS – was I ever pissed.

 

I hadn’t understood the whole Iran-Contra thing but when Khomeini started up with his death threats against Rushdie, I started to think long and hard about theocracy, democracy, and our government, particularly the party that was in charge at the time – the Republicans.

 

Anyway – stuff was happening around the world and it came at me and I really started to focus on something other than “my personal little world.”

 

The Solidarity movement winning elections in Poland on June 5, 1989 was such a contract to the events of the previous day in China. It gave me a little hope that people who worked through grass roots movements and strived for freedom – democracy, free elections, rights – could win if they stuck together. The Berlin wall coming down – that was huge. October and November of 1989 was massive in my world political view. Then fall of communism in the Soviet Union in February 1990, wow, no more USSR. Was it the end of the Cold War? Well – not yet, that didn’t happen ‘officially’ until July 1990.

 

Followed closely by the US invasion of Panama in December, and the arrest of General Manuel Noriega for drug trafficking. I did not agree with the extreme clamp down by Noriega’s government on the limited democracy that existed in Panama, but I certainly didn’t think it was up to the US to be the world’s watchdog and invade a country.

 

OH - and also, the revolution in Romania. I clearly remember the face of Nicole Ceausecu, the deposed dictator of Romania – shot dead with his wife. It was bloody and terrible, the civil war in Romania, but it led to freedom for the Romanian people.

 

There were also tremendous environmental issues that opened my eyes. The Exxon Valdez tanker ran aground in Prince William Sound in Alaska. The HUGE environmental impact on that pristine wilderness coalesced my anger with large corporations and the greed of the oil industry giving me another topic to read about. See – my government studies teacher gave me a list of books that I needed to choose from and read. One of them was “Rating America’s Corporate Conscience – A Provocative Guide To the Companies Behind The Products You Buy Every Day”. That book really was a shake up for me, as did some of the other books I read, like, “The Movement and The Sixties” by Terry H. Anderson.

 

There was a teacher’s strike at my high school and my government studies teacher was the ‘ringleader’. Several of his ‘favorite’ students staged a student protest on the front lawn. 600 other students to followed (about 34% of the student body) and joined the sit in. We didn’t feel that the teachers were being paid enough AND many of us were upset that ‘downtown’ was directing things at our school when we thought it should be the staff at the school who knew our needs best that should be directing things. This went along with what the teachers union said and felt too. We carried protest signs and supported the striking teachers with coffee, donuts, and brown bag lunches. None of us were suspended and several of the others had their parents come and join the sit in. This girl I knew actually called the news networks to get them to come down and film the protest. They never aired it because they didn’t want to encourage other such protests by students across the district. Still – the news spread and within a week, a great number of high schools across the LAUSD were faced with massive student protests on behalf of the striking teachers. So, in1989 when after a two-week strike the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) settled a labor contract with LAUSD that mandated a shift toward site-based management (SBM) of the district’s schools and budget.

 

I participated in a march on the Federal Building in Westwood on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

 

Then, Nelson Mandela was released from prison in February 1990 and I became very interested in South Africa and their civil rights issues.

 

The US Supreme court overturning the law banning flag burning June 11, 1990 was HUGE for me.

 

I took trip to Europe and went to college there in the fall of 1990. The Persian Gulf War broke out while I was there. Margaret Thatcher left office and John Major became Prime Minister. Americans abroad feared for their lives. It was horrible and even though I thought the evasion of Kuwait by Iraq was wrong, I was angry at then President Bush for sending my friends there to fight over oil.

 

History has made me who I am, and shattered my personal beliefs I once clung to like a security blanket. It became clear to me that overly zealous religious conservatives caused a great deal of turmoil in the Middle East. I analyzed my own religious beliefs, took several classes in religious studies in college (Judaism, Eastern Religions, “Pagan” Religions). I figured after studying the Bible since I was three years old, I needed to hear what other religions thought and believed. It was a true eye opener. I realized that there were huge differences and yet tremendous similarities. The one thing that became very clear to me was the religion was really about control and fear. By implanting fear in the populace and then telling them that only through the clergy can one find ‘salvation’ from whatever is causing the fear, the clergy was controlling the masses. The skeptic in me was born and yet, the little girl who wanted to believe that there was a purpose and a masterful design to all things didn’t want to let go.

 

Here I am, 36 years old, and still baffled by the gullibility of people who don’t seek their own personal relationship with the divine, but rather have it spoon fed to them by oppressive organizations like the Taliban, the Vatican, Al Qaida, Watchtower Society, etc. About two weeks ago or so, I was driving home and I heard that a part of the Episcopalian church had broken away because of issues over women being ordained, women being ordained as Bishops, and about openly gay clergy. The guy that was leading the people to leave the church had some pretty hateful speech going on. It was very anti-woman and anti-gay as if they weren’t living breathing creations of God. He was going on and on about this and that being unchristian and all I can think of was, Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, and that the only guidance Jesus left us was to love your neighbor as yourself. Everything Jesus wanted us to do could be summed up with – love everyone and be good to and understanding of each other. Here was this ‘man of God’ on the radio saying that gays were sinners destined to burn in Hell. Boy that just chapped my hide. Who is he to judge? He’s not perfect, and he himself is a sinner. AND, if you believe in the Bible and what it says, you can believe that Jesus died for everyone’s sins, to wash them clean, so that even people who are sinners can be cleaned of their sins if they accept Christ as their savior.

 

Well, listening to that stuff on the radio, on NPR no less, reaffirmed my belief that organized religion does more to separate people than it does to bring them together.

 

So what do I personally believe or what are my ideas? Here goes:

 

• I believe the Earth, Solar System, Galaxy, Universe – all of it – is wondrous no matter how it got here. It’s glorious and spectacular and should be appreciated, cared for as best we can, and respected.
• I believe that each living individual entity (plant, mammal, bird, fish, etc.) has an inherent right to exist in its natural setting and should be allowed to do so without undo harm, abuse, or destruction
• I believe that people should stop hurting other people; that too many people take pleasure in creating discord and anarchy for the sake of their own personal enjoyment and fulfillment causing suffering to others
• I believe that all genders have the same rights of existence and are absolutely of equal value to the universe
• I believe that all cultures have their inherent value and that no other culture should try and destroy another
• I believe that although there are many different varieties of people, we are all humans needing sustenance, companionship, love, respect, hope and peace.
• I believe that as long as I am not hurting another separate independent living entity, I should be allowed to do whatever I want with my own body including ending my own life if that is what I choose to do
• I believe that no government or organization has been true to its established charter, constitution, founding papers, etc. and that they are imperfect groups run by imperfect people
• I believe that you have the right to believe whatever you want to, but that your beliefs don’t necessary make you right, nor do my beliefs make me right, and we do not have to agree with each other, merely acknowledge that we have differences, that each individual has the right to their personal beliefs, and that in no way, shape, or form should anyone try to force their personal moral code upon another
• I believe in harmony – differences blended together to create a working balance of tones

Christian Me?
Mood:  incredulous
Topic: Sacrelicious

What kind of Christian are you? Your Result: You Are An Evangelical   You believe that salvation is by grace through faith. That each element is indispensible in bringing a man/woman to salvation. You tend to interpet the bible as it was written and do not seek to add to or take away from its meaning based on your own theology
You Are A Pentacostal
You Are A Catholic
You Are A Protestant
What kind of Christian are you? Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

WOW - talk about a weird quiz result. ME! Evengelical?

This takes the cake! LOL...perhaps the writers of this quiz should read my blog, ay?

Religions and Politics Don't Mix
Mood:  incredulous
Topic: Sacrelicious
IMHO, all religions are just attempts by man to explain the unexplainable and control the masses of humankind. Some people need guides, need focus, need to be told what to do since they can't think for themselves. But not everyone.

Religions were and are used to govern. They lay down laws and get people to follow them by saying something bad will happen to you in the afterlife - or you'll be reincarnated to live again and again until you 'get it right'. It's all about fear and control.

Being a FORMER Jehovah's Witness, I know about the twisting of religious text to suit the needs of the religion's (or cult's) leaders. It doesn't matter if it is the Bible, Koran, the Book of Mormon, whatever "insert religious text here", it's about explaining things that are un-seen, and truly un-provable.

I look at the world and I see an amazing place; same with the universe. It's amazing, but I do not need an explanation for it. If it was created by an all knowing Creator - that's awesome. If it was a big bang that exploded for no reason and we evolved - wow, how amazing is that? Either way, the natural world is special and awesome - either it was created just for us or it beat tremendous odds and evolved into this marvel. It can be appreciated and revered without the invisible man in the sky.

I don't need a religion to give me laws to live by, because they will be used to judge my morality. Government shouldn't judge morality, that's why I don't feel a political candidate should be judged by their religious beliefs. Tell me what is the plan for taking care of the Health Care issue in this country, or the education of our children, or the reduction of the debt. How about making sure the gap between poor and rich gets smaller, how about that? I could care less if the candidate is into Voodoo or not - what does that have to do with their ability to coordinate government agencies and lead people?

Organized religion is the great divider. It creates small groups of 'us' and pits them against the rest of the world - 'them'. Please someone out there, give me an example of a 'mainstream' religion - and I mean MAINSTREAM, that is fully accepting of EVERYTHING. Absolutely EVERYTHING - all races, all inter-personal relationships, all sexual preferences, the rights of women to choose to have an abortion, the right for clergy to be women, allowing that other religions are the correct path? Can you name one?

It's all very sad. All this 'believe as I believe' or you're an infidel or sinner, or heretic, or whatever.

We are all different and unique, but we are all HUMAN. We are all entitled to our own beliefs. If we could all agree to play nice with one another - stop killing each other, stop abusing each other - just treat other people with respect, couldn't we make this world work? I will not force my belief that organized religions are the cause of the worlds woes - I'm just stating it here. Agree with me or not - that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Big Butter Jesus & Your Personal Alignment
Mood:  mischievious
Topic: Sacrelicious
It seems that all the ingrained Bible Study and fear of God that was shoved down my throat by the Jehovah Witnesses during the years of my youth have not slackened my like of the "sacreligious" or as I have changed it to, sacrelicious! Yes, I was a Jehovah's Witnesses from basically two years old to eighteen years old. I did the Bible study thing every week, book study on Tuesday night, Theocratic Ministry School every Thursday night, the two hour Sunday meeting thing every week AND sporadically throughout my years ages 12-18 I was a person who went door to door - sometimes reaching "Publisher" status by spending 40 hours a week knocking on people's doors during the day trying to spread 'the good news of the kingdom'.

After a good break from the religious scene from 1990 to 1996, I jumped back in joining the United Church of Christ as...get this...a Minister of Music. Yes, a paid member of the church providing musical selections that went along with the church calendar, scripture readings, etc. We had a processional, Anthem, and at least three hymns every service. Besides the weekly changing music there were responses that were done after each part of the service and special music for special occasions like communion, baptisms, holidays, et al.

So, for me to get off so much on something so totally sacreligious as the Heywood Banks song "Big Butter Jesus", you have to admit that I've mellowed religiously and am pretty open to good natured jokes about religion. Go to www.youtube.com and in the search type in Big Butter Jesus...you'll see what I mean. This is totally not for the easily offended. Thank you Heywood Banks and thank you Bob and Tom!

I shared all this with my husband. We had a good laugh and then I asked him what his father would think. My husband's father is an ordained Mennonite pastor. Yes, he went to seminary school, graduated, and has pastored a church consistently for the last 31 years. Granted, not the SAME church, he's been moved around a lot. Virginia, Michigan, Kansas, Indiana, New York, Pennsylvania...not in that order of course. Currently, he left the traditional Mennonite denomination and is now a pastor for a Church of the Brethren.
Ed's Church Page

How do the Mennonites differ from the Church of the Brethren? I asked my husband and his response was "F**k if I know." As you can tell, neither of us was sure nor did we really want to put much thought behind finding an answer. So, I turned to the Internet in search for a quick check because I wasn't about to call my father-in-law and say "Dad, what is the big difference between the Mennonites and the Brethren?" From what I can find out on the Internet it comes down to foot washing. Everything looks about the same. I'll have to ask him about all that.

This all brings me back to the original question...what would Ed think about Big Butter Jesus? I think he'd laugh. He's good natured and understands tongue in cheek. He also probably feels as I do...something along the lines of the ten commandments, commandment number four "You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." I think the 60 foot statue of Jesus not only breaks this commandment but blasts it back to Mount Sinai. Is Moses turning in his forgotten grave somewhere? Well, if he is, he's drilling through the earth by now because how many of these Jesus statues are there...Rio de Janeiro comes to mind, that's 128 feet tall (I looked it up) and is on top of a mountain peak overlooking the city that's over 2,200 feet tall - nearly half a mile! How about every Catholic Church out there with statues of Jesus, Mary, the apostles, etc, all accompanied by little candles and incense and kneeling people praying to the statue and the person it represents rather than to GOD?! It is amazing.

I am not perfect, nor do I REALLY attempt to live the 'Christ like' life purposefully. I don't really know if I ever did since I can't remember a time when I didn't mess up and do something woefully sinful. Basically, I try to be good to others, charitable, loving, as forgiving as an imperfect person as myself can be, and most of all, I try to enjoy life. Is that Christ-like? Not sure many hardcore Christians out there would think so. Why are we here if not to enjoy the life we've been given? Here is the big 'thing' behind that idea though...everyone enjoys life in a different manner and some of the ways people enjoy life cause pain to others, or outright break the law that society has placed upon those who live within it. What if that law is unjust? Well, that's a personal dilemma then isn't it?

Now THAT sentiment earns me the alignment of Chaotic Good I guess. What the heck does alignment have to do with religion or with how you live your life? What's alignment anyway? Well, for those gamers out there who partake in Dungeons and Dragons, you know exactly what I am talking about. For those of you who don't do the D&D thing, alignment is a categorization of the moral and ethical perspective of the player characters, non-player characters, monsters, and societies in the game. Here is an explanation of alignments:

Nine distinct alignments define all the possible combinations of the lawful-chaotic axis with the good-evil axis. Each alignment description below depicts how characters of that alignment typically act. Individuals, however, may vary from this norm. Any given character may act more or less in accord with his or her alignment from day to day.

Lawful Good
"Crusader"

Lawful good characters act as good people are expected or required to act. They combine a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. They tell the truth, keep their words, helps those in need and will speak out against injustices. A lawful good character hates seeing the guilty go unpunished.

Lawful good characters believe that an ideal society is one with a well-organized government and law-abiding citizens.

Neutral Good
"Benefactor"

Neutral good characters do the best that a good person can do. These characters are devoted to helping others, and believe that the forces of law and chaos should not moderate the need for people to do good. These characters will support social structures only when they are for the good of the community. If overthrowing an existing social order is what needs to be done to foster good, then they will not be afraid to do so.

Chaotic Good
"Rebel"

Chaotic good characters act where their conscience directs them, with little regard for the expectations of others. They believe firmly in making their own way in life, and dislike others who try to intimidate or use their authority on them.

Chaotic good characters always follow their own moral compass, believing that goodness and righteousness have little use for laws and authority. Although they are always kind and benevolent, their views often do not agree with that of society.

Lawful Neutral
"Judge"

Lawful neutral characters act as law, tradition, or a personal code directs them. Order and organization are paramount to them, and believe that order and organization come about moral righteousness.

These characters may believe in a personal order and live by a code or standard, or believe in order for all and support strong, organized governments.

Neutral
"Undecided"

Neutral characters do whatever seems to be a 'good idea'. They don't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or order vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction, or bias rather than a commitment to true neutrality. Such characters think of good as being better than evil (after all, they would rather have good neighbors and kind kings than evil ones), but are not personally committed to upholding good in any way.

True Neutral
"Balancer"

Some neutral characters commit themselves to a philosophy of neutrality. These people are extremely rare in a world where most people make value judgments, and are said to be "true neutral."

True Neutral characters see good, evil, law and chaos as simply prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate that the middle way of neutrality is the best and most balanced road in the long run.

Some true neutral characters will actively support neutrality and balance in the world. They will avoid having to support any one side, whether that be good or evil, order or chaos; and will work to see that all of these forces remain in balance.

Other true neutrals are simply characters who are tired of this concept of 'morality', and find that they draw no meaning from it. These characters are not neutral out of choice, but simply that they care not either way - they are passively neutral, but still falls under the banner of true neutral.


Druidic True Neutral
In Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, all druids were true neutral. The true neutral alignment is central to the philosophy of neutral druids.

This is because a druid's main charges ? plants, animals, and the health of the planetary ecology ? essentially lack alignment or ethos. Therefore, druids can feel free to use almost any means necessary to protect them.

The druidic order works to maintain the natural balance among the alignments. However, druids do realize that the actions of others ? including their own ? will prove significant to the cosmic balance. The druid sees the friction between alignments as the driving force in the world.

When faced with a tough decision, a druid usually stands behind the solution that best serves nature in the long run.

Chaotic Neutral
"Free Spirit"

Chaotic neutral characters follow their own whims. They are an individualist first and last, and values their own liberty (but will not strive to protect the freedom of others). They avoid authority, resent restrictions, and challenge traditions. However, they would not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. This is because to do so, they would have to be motivated either by good (a desire to liberate others) or evil (a desire to make those different from himself suffer).

Chaotic neutral characters may be unpredictable, but their behavior is not totally random - they are not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it. However, they do act on momentary whims, and are known to be unreliable. As some would say, "the only reliable thing about them is that they cannot be relied upon!"

Strongly Chaotic Neutral
There are some Chaotic Neutral characters, such as the Xaositects, who choose to act in a manner that is as random as possible. Such people will regularly change their appearance, their attitudes, even the way they speak . These characters see chaos as the most important force in the universe (similar to how Lawful Neutral characters may see Law as a force upheld regardless of consequences). As a result, these characters might intentionally disrupt organizations on the simple basis that organizations are lawful entities which oppose the chaos. Such characters may appear insane to those not similarly inclined towards chaos.

Lawful Evil
"Dominator"

Lawful evil characters use a society's structure and laws to their own advantage. They will play by the rules without mercy or compassion, to take what they want without regard for whom it hurts. They care about tradition, loyalty and order; but not of freedom, dignity or life. They are comfortable in a hierarchy and enjoy ruling, but are willing to serve out of fear of punishment. They will condemn others not according to their actions, but according to their race, religion, homeland or social rank.

However, because they depend on order and law to protect themselves against those who oppose them on moral grounds, they will almost always Honor a lawful oath or contract that they have made, even if it turns out to be unfavorable for them. Because of this, Lawful Evil characters tend to be very careful when giving out their word.

Lawful evil characters may have particular taboos, such as not killing cold blood or not letting children come into harm; and like to imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains. Other Lawful evil characters will commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good.

Neutral Evil
"Malefactor"

Neutral evil characters will do whatever they can get away with. They are out for themselves, and will shed no tears for those they kill or harm, whether it was for profit, sport, or convenience. They have no love of order and hold no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make them any better or any more noble. On the other hand, they do not have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil individual has.

Some neutral evil villains hold up evil as an ideal, committing evil for its own sake like the way a neutral good character believes in good for its own sake. Such characters are also often devoted to some dark deity or society.

Chaotic Evil
"Destroyer"

Chaotic evil characters do whatever their greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drives them to do. They are hot-tempered, vicious and arbitrarily violent. They are simply out for whatever they can get, and are ruthless and brutal in their ways. Typically, the plans of a chaotic evil character are haphazard, and any groups they form are poorly organized. Chaotic evil characters can be made to work together only by force, with leaders lasting only as long as they can thwart uprisings and assassinations against them.

Sooooo...those alignments having been spelled out for you clearly, now...what alignment are you?

I feel I hover between Neutral Good and Chaotic Good, but definitely on the Good scale of things.

What about these men:

George "Dubya" Bush

Bill Gates

Ted Kennedy

Osahma Bin Laden

Gahndi

Malcolm X

Abraham Lincoln

David Duke

Joseph Stalin

Theodore John "Ted" Kaczynski (aka The Unabomber)

What about these women:

Hilary Clinton

Monica Lewinsky

Jena Jameson

Helen Keller

Queen Elizabeth II

Marilyn Monroe

Marie Antoinette

Rosa Parks

Eleanore Roosevelt

I don't know anyone's alignment, I merely bring it up as a conversational piece. So there you are...everything from religion to social alignment in one post. And hey, don't go doggin' on the Unabomber's Manifesto, he's not totally crazy. *wink*