Zo’s latest rant: Worshipping Mother Earth
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXRC57Ja1Sk&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
You see, God had a real problem with people worshiping other gods because of the things that people would do in their idol worship. Things like incest, cannibalism, child sacrifice, and God really hates child sacrifice. Tribes that worshiped other idols had a bad habit of doing that.
And the same mentality of those tribes who would sacrifice their children to their idols still exist today, as many liberals believe we have a population problem. And for the good of the earth, or the “earth goddess” that the earthlings have put before God, have made it their appointment to save the planet from humanity, or even God: “The population should be controlled!“
~Zo, Macho Sauce Productions ,via Conservatives 4 Palin, April 27
[Discussion begins at 3:12]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I agree with the quote above.
I am disappointed in our space program, that so many Americans don’t value it like they should. Instead, we have become a very selfish society. And instead of fixing our selfishness, some people just want to destroy humanity. We can love our earthly home while still loving ourselves. We can solve our energy problems, we can better distribute our food, and we can colonize space.
God showed Abraham the stars and said, “Just so shall your descendants be.”
I really like Zo!!! have been watching him for a long time. .
And as the christian mother of one of those wiccan wingnuts he is talking about, I totally agree with him.
All praise to the Creator God Almighty!!
That must be hard, mama3.
Thanks for alerting me to the existence of this guy. IMHO, he’s more wacky than any Wiccan I’ve ever heard.
I know. The bible or Mother Earth?
Decisions, decisions…
I’d love to see him take out Saturday Night Live.
Calder, what does that even mean? Does he have a TV show that runs on Saturday nights?
Very good and spot on! I will echo Hal’s question – where do we find him beyond the link? Is he on TV? Thank you – and I hope this gets wide play! ;)
He’s a regular on PJTV.com, an online television channel. His series was titled “ZoNation”.
He’s based out of LA, that is, if he hasn’t moved recently.
His kind of material would never make SNL. Too conservative.
Unless SNL dares to go there. Not holding my breath.
I’m a Zo fan too. I was hooked when I first watched a video of his on YouTube. He is on PJTV.com. I think he’s brilliant. Thanks for sharing this!
I’m personally rather insulted by this. I’m an agnostic, but I am very partial to nature and nature-based religions (though of course, “nature-based” is greatly simplifying things). It doesn’t make me evil or what I believe evil. Though Zo did make me think about one thing: the level of aggression people have toward one another. He seems to have considerable aggression to us environmentalists/”pagans” (a problematic term for various reasons) and lots of liberal people have aggression to Christians. This is certainly not true for all people, but this level of hostility is dangerous and needs to be evaluated.
Does he come across as hostile to you?
He’s just trying to point out priorities among different groups.
And being rather, er, humble about it.
The hostility that is dangerous is the one that’s actually killing people: some fathers who coerce their pregnant partners to abort have and do use the “overpopulation” argument. The one child (soon to become a two child) policy in China isn’t just a theory, but a reality where mothers are arrested, assaulted, and their children are murdered. This isn’t just a heated debate among us, since there is a body count. As a society, we have become more polite and less tolerant of emotional expression, while at the same time turning the other way while innocent humans are slaughtered.
I’ve always loved Zo’s videos.
A nature-based theology leaves the door open for “the law of the jungle” or “survival of the fittest” attitude. Funny how “we” end up being the “fittest” and others – especially the soon-to-be-born – are fair game.
Hans,
That’s not necessarily true. I can’t name a religion that operates on those principles, nor can I name a religion that is simply survival of the the fittest. Religions, all religions, are more complicated than that.
Ninek,
You are right about not being shy about standing up for what’s right. I hate to be hostile. And I am not saying that as, “Oh, I’m a girl and need to talk nicely and need to be polite and yada yada yada.” I am saying that I am trying to be a better person and find a better approach to social justice. I have been getting so much into Gandhi and want to work by his principles. Obviously, I have a bad temper (cough, cough), but I keep repeating to myself, “Means and ends.” :)
I don’t think this needs to be a polarized “population control vs. carrying about like there are no pressing environmental issues” debate. Sustainability should be a point of interest for everybody, regardless of the stance on abortion. The country of Bangladesh is going to be under water within the next 100 years, guaranteed. Where are the refugees from environmental disasters going to go? How can we best take care of them? It’s not enough to leave it up to fate or God or some moonbat belief that we can just rocket all our woes on Earth to the moon. And NO, I’m not saying abortion is the “solution,” so don’t even pull that one. But I do find that it’s convenient for prolifers to demand that everybody gets born without any real consideration of what that life will be like. And ten to one, prochoicers and the socially conscious tend to pick up the slack in the social safety net.
And NO, I’m not saying abortion is the “solution,” so don’t even pull that one. But I do find that it’s convenient for prolifers to demand that everybody gets born without any real consideration of what that life will be like.
If pro-lifers demand everybody gets born without any consideration, how does that convince me that you are not saying that abortion is the solution? You are, so grow a pair and admit it.
And ten to one, prochoicers and the socially conscious tend to pick up the slack in the social safety net.
Wrong again; statistics keep proving that politically conservative people and poor people give a larger percentage of their income to charitable causes than liberal people and wealthy people. Finally, I don’t consider aborting inconvenient children as a way to “pick up the slack.” Abortion is murder. Simple. It solves nothing.
Some people who encounter challenges in life view them as opportunities. We don’t all wish we’re dead when something goes wrong. But it’s just so compassionate of the abortion advocates to decide when someone ELSE’s life isn’t going to be worth living, isn’t it??
It isn’t pro- or anti- abortion to say that we need to think of some sustainable solutions before we destroy everything decent about this planet.
prolifers to demand that everybody gets born without any real consideration of what that life will be like.
Your words, not mine. We need to think of solutions that DO NOT include murder. I know, it’s hard and makes your brain hurt. Real long term solutions take real long term work. We can’t solve our problems sucking babies out of their mother’s wombs every 10 minutes on a Saturday. 60 million dead American children have not created the utopia you were hoping for, has it?
It isn’t pro- or anti- abortion to say that we need to think of some sustainable solutions before we destroy everything decent about this planet.
Megan, true, but from my perspective – having read some history and being 52 years old – I’d say that the degree to which we heed the “before” you mention is probably quite small. Humanity has to learn the hard way, over and over, from what I’ve seen, and population pressure/economic pressure is largely opposed to environmental concerns, overall.
I think the latter are going to lose out until if it’s not simply too late, it’ll be a long nasty time while the concerns fight it out. IMO one by-product of that will be the end of most of the arguing over “overpopulation” or not, i.e. won’t be much disagreement at that point.