A RELIGIOUS CONTRADICTION IN TERMS
This notion of a male God in back (the
so-called Creator) who makes woman whose seed, as all males will know,
constantly wars on man, on the male sex, centrifugal attire to his centripetal,
long hair to his short, sharp heels to his blunt, long fingernails to his
short, made-up eyes to his plain, and so on, is so contradictory as to be,
frankly, ludicrous and, what's more, an affront not only to common sense but to
religion itself, not to mention the male sex, who have to live with the notion
that the women who constantly war on them for reproductive ends do so at the
behest of a male God who would have found nothing unusual or contradictory
about such a predicament.
Frankly, this is just one of a number of reasons
why I want to see conventional Creator-based religion consigned to the
proverbial rubbish bin of history in due course, when we are in an ideological
position to begin the long and arduous process of getting rid of it, as of
ridding society of its duplicitous influence.
Even the notion of God having the power and the
glory, as in the Lord's Prayer, is a gender contradiction in terms, since both
power and glory appertain, in their proper manifestations, to the female side
of life in relation to beauty and pride, the former affiliated to metachemical free soma as the fulcrum of will, and the
latter to chemical free soma as the fulcrum of spirit. Neither have anything to
do with male sensibility, whether in form or contentment, ego or soul, physics
or metaphysics, never mind the pseudo-will and the pseudo-spirit of
pseudo-power and pseudo-glory in pseudo-metaphysics and pseudo-physics, which
apply to what could be called gender-subordinate positions (corresponding to
'sons-of-bitches') under the female hegemonies of metachemistry
and chemistry, and which amount to no more than pseudo-truth under beauty in
the metachemical/pseudo-metaphysical dichotomy and
pseudo-pleasure under pride in the chemical/pseudo-physical one.
The only religions power and glory have
anything to do with are necessarily 'bovaryized'
religions, which are designed to give a religious front, or semblance, to
societies dominated by the rule of either science or politics. As for that type
of society dominated by economics, of which we in this age are only too
familiar, that too requires a 'bovaryized' order of
religion which is less metachemical or chemical than
physical in character, and thus no more than an alternative approach to 'the
world', as to worldliness, than that represented by the rule of politics in
chemical domination, a domination necessitating an emphasis upon glory as
opposed to form, and one with very close gender ties to the scientific
domination of religion by power, which is not only the most fundamentalist mode
of religion but also that which is most 'bovayized'
and thus furthest removed from metaphysical truth in its metachemical
emphasis upon beauty hyped as truth, as, correlatively, upon Devil the Mother
hyped, in Creator-esque vein, as God the Father.
We who champion the truth can have no truck
with the half-truth of ego-bovaryized religion, never
mind the half-lie and whole lie, so to speak, of spirit- and will-bovaryized religions, which grant undue importance to power
and glory at the expense not only of Christian form, but of what could be
called Superchristian contentment, the contentment of
metaphysical soul which I regard it as Social Theocracy's duty to both uphold
and advance in a world still dominated by the Lie and the beautiful rule, in
consequence, of free will.
