Karajou’s Kommandments

So Brian Macdonald, Consevapedia’s resident swabbie and all-round Mr. Perpetually Angry, has decided to give us his take on the 10 Commandments. Now personally, I can’t say I have anything against them – after all, most of them, especially the last 6, are a pretty decent set of rules to live by. Admittedly, none of my neighbours have an ox that I can covet, but I’m sure that’s not God’s fault. You can also say that they’re a pretty decent set of rules for a rag-tag bunch of nomads, being led through the desert by a madman with no sense of direction – especially when said madman has to conjure up the image of an eye-in-the-sky watching everybody, to make sure they behave… and do exactly what the madman tells them. Of course, I’m only assuming that Moses was mad, but you have to be kind of special to traipse around the Sinai desert for 40 years… However, the last thing you want in that situation are fights breaking out, because oxen were being coveted.

However, when they get given the treatment by somebody with a massive chip on both shoulders, who blames liberals for all the ills in the world (and no doubt all the failings in his own life) and who is incapable of debating the facts without foaming at the mouth and rolling on the floor – seriously, Macdonald is the only CP sysop who scares me in the sense that he would resort to physical violence should we ever (goddess forbid!) meet – and spewing invectives left, right and center, they take on a strange, new, perverted meaning. Which is nothing new really, when it comes to the interpretation of Christianity through Conservapedians’ eyes.

He lists the commandments, followed by his take on the “Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments,” because – as you know – liberals and secular society are clamouring everywhere, constantly for the 10 Commandments to be revoked. Which would be interesting, had they ever been made law in the first place. Let’s have a look at Brian’s take on things and in between banging my head on my desk, I’ll try and offer up some comments of my own.

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.


You cannot worship any god other than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Includes material objects or concepts which serve to replace God, such as money or power.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Various religions world-wide; cults; “Church” of Satan; paganism; atheism; material goods; politics and political philosophies; anything that promotes or pushes a replacement of God as a center of daily life.

I can only assume that Brian’s having a dip at Buddhism, Shinto and all the other non-Abrahamic religions here, because in his mind, Christianity is the only One True Religion. I wonder if he knows that “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” means he’s including Muslims in his “in crowd,” because if there’s one thing Brian hates more than a liberal, it’s a Muslim. It’s also worth mentioning that most cults are religious and pseudo-Christian in nature – everybody from Jim Jones, to the Moonies and Mormons.

There’s a certain perverse irony that Mr. Perpetually Angry thinks he’s a better person than some dreamy, tree-hugging pagan, purely because he bases his life on some Bronze Age cult.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath… blah blah blah


You cannot make an image (photo, sculpture, painting, etc.) for the purpose of worshiping it.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Popular culture (record labels, shows like American Idol, movie stars, etc); secular science.

Well, we all know that Simon Cowell is the anti-Christ, but I seriously doubt people worship him. And yes, there are people who really, really, really like certain pop-stars, but I doubt any of them (except a few special people, who shouldn’t be allowed near sharp objects) actually pray to Lady Gaga every night, in the hope of getting an extra banana in the morning. Also, Brian might want to have a word with people like Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, William Blake and all those other naughty people who painted and sculpted God and Jesus… oh yes, usually at the request of the Church. Strangely, I can’t think of any photos of God ever being displayed.

Brian also can’t help but let his own petty prejudices shine through in the mention of “secular science.” He’s right at the fore of Conservapedia’s anti-science brigade, but makes the age-old mistake of assuming that just because people believe in a bunch of proven and tested hypothesis (yes, it’s a very simplified view of science), we somehow worship those scientists. I certainly enjoy the work of people like Hawking and Dawkins, but I’m hardly going to live my life according to what they say. Having a brain, I can process their ideas, rationalise them and accept or discard them as I see fit. I certainly don’t need to wear a WWDD bracelet to make it through the day.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.


It is insulting to take God’s name or title and use it as a vulgar expletive.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Common use of “Jesus Christ” as an epithet in everyday language.

Well yes, I suppose we are all guilty of that. I suppose Brian swears in a very 1950s BBC way – all “gosh!” and “darn!” Of course, if he ever says “Gee!” or “Jeepers!” then he too is asking to be smitten by the Big Man in the Sky. Blaming it on liberals is also pretty pathetic. People were uttering blasphemies like mad way back in the 17th century – a time when being the wrong religion could result in you being the center of attraction at a barbeque. Even Shakespeare used the – at the time – terrible “zounds” or “s’blood” – shortened form of “God’s wounds” and “God’s blood”. The minced oath “Gad,” said instead of “God” was being used back in 1608, and the quaint “gadzooks” – meaning “God’s hooks” or the nail on the cross – survived to Victorian times. Even something as innocent sounding as “strewth” is taken from “God’s truth,” so to pin the blame on “liberals and secular society” is disingenuous at best on Brian’s part.

4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, blah, blah, blah…


If violated, destructive of the day of rest earned from a week of work.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Successful removal of the “Blue Laws” in most states, forcing employees to skip church and work or be fired.

Now, not being a Yank, I need to turn to Wikipedia to see what these Blue Laws are. Strangely, they seem to pertain mostly to things like the selling of alcohol, car dealerships being open on a Sunday and in some cases, hunting.

Some of the latter are quite funny. Pennsylvania, for example, prohibits Sunday hunting, with the exception of foxes, crows and coyotes. In Virginia, you can hunt raccoons on a Sunday, up to 2am and can use dogs all day to “hunt bear, raccoon and fox.”

However, one thing that I can’t see is the thing about employees having to “skip church or be fired.” In fact, Massachusetts has a “Day of Rest” statute that provides that all employees are entitled to one day off from work in seven calendar days and staff who do work on Sundays must be paid time-and-a-half.

The final irony is that it’s thanks to those socialist unions that Brian and the rest of the Conservapedia goons hate so much, that he even has a weekend at all to enjoy (although I suppose Henry Ford does deserve some credit). If employers had their way, Brian would be slaving away in a mill for 20 hours a day, with no job security. Instead, he’s attending university, at tax payers’ expense.

5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.


If violated, destructive of the Creator/creation relationship, of which the father/mother represents.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Incidents of patricide/matricide; wrathful words spoken by children against their parents.

Again, I suppose that you can’t really argue against this one. It was probably the fault of the 50s and 60s, when children first began to look at their parents and go “What the fuck?” – before growing up to be just like their parents. And yes, patri- and matricide do happen, but parents also kill (and abuse) their children. Somehow I think that God/parent relationship needs to work both ways.

Then again, the Bible seems to be pretty hard on the poor kids. Just look what happens to the uppity brats in Deuteronomy 21:18-21:

If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.

Maybe Brian’s yearning for the good old days. Also bonus points for Brian using the nasty, liberal English spelling of “honour.”

6. Thou shalt not kill.


If violated, destructive of life in general. Includes murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide, or simple hatred against someone else.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Hatred for Christians, Jews, conservatives, including demands for death; abortion industry; support for third-world dictatorships engaged in socialism/communism.

Whoa – hold on there a minute, skippy. What about hatred for liberals, Muslims, homosexuals, atheists, etc, etc? Not to mention Obama – I think he falls well within the “simple hatred against someone else” category. I wonder if Angry Bear wrote this section with a straight face, because his omissions are both glaring and telling.  He’s not even going with the “love the sinner, hate the sin” line – he’s out and out excluding the above from the list of people it’s not ok to hate. Once again his personal prejudices (not to mention interpretation of the scripture) come shining through.

His comment about “support for third-world dictatorships engaged in socialism/communism” is also bizarre. Does that mean it’s ok to support the blood-thirsty dictatorships of people like Pinochet, Mobutu Sese Seko, the Shah and even Saddam Hussain? It must be a strange world to live in, where a brutal dictator is “ok” because he’s “one of ours.” Then again, given Brian’s actions and attitude on Conservapedia, it’s fairly clear he thinks dictatorships are a good thing – as long as they’re killing people Brian hates.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.


If violated, destructive of the family unit. Included with adultery are extra-marital relations; platonic relations; affairs; homosexuality; perverse sexual practices; thoughts and dreams of engaging in it.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Promotion of homosexuality and pedophilia; spread of pornography; large number of divorces; permissiveness and acceptance of adultery within the media and popular culture.

First, a quick moan – Brian’s continued use of “If violated, destructive of…” is really starting to get on my nerves. I know it’s a lot to expect of a Conservapedia sysop, but at least put a little thought into the way you write. Thank you, back to the post.

Oh dear. It’s starting to get strange. Platonic relationships are adultery? So in other words, Brian’s wife (or presumably ex-wife) isn’t allowed to have male friends, and vice versa? Then again, I can picture him being that kind of domineering shit. Also, if a husband and wife decide to get up to some “perverse sexual practices” – which in Brian’s world probably includes doggy style and doing it with the lights on – how can they possibly be committing adultery? He really is a strange man – especially when you take the ” thoughts and dreams of engaging in it” comment. Either Brian is wracked by guilt, or he doesn’t think.

And if adultery promotes homosexuality and paedophilia, then people like Newt Gingrich have a lot of explaining to do! It’s such a stupid, pig-ignorant comment that it barely deserves a response, suffice to say that it’s just another glaring example of Brian’s bigotry. I’d actually like to ask him how a man cheating on his wife promotes homosexuality, but I’m scared he’d shoot me in the face.

8. Thou shalt not steal.


Stealing includes robbery, burglary, piracy, embezzlement, taxation without representation.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Eminent domain (taking of property to give to others); heavy progressive taxation.

Finally, we have our Teabagger moment – “taxation without representation.” I have news for Brian – that happens in every democratic country in the world. People who didn’t vote for the ruling government still have to pay the taxes levied by that government. There’s a term for it, but I’m too lazy to look it up. It’s exactly the same as Democrats having to pay Reagan or Bush’s taxes, but I’m guessing that in your world, that just makes them typical sniveling liberals.

It’s also sad (and telling) that you can only rant against that Black Man in the White House as an example. Here’s another one for you, free of charge – plagiarism is also stealing. But then again, seeing as that’s something you’re guilty of, one can hardly expect you to mention it.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

If violated, destructive of the individual committing it as well as the victim receiving it; destructive to society as a whole. Includes lying and deceit.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Corrupt politicians in state and local governments; liberal media distorting news items to manipulate the audience; evolution; global warming; atheism.

Calling people liars is one of Brian’s stock responses when being called out on his bullshit, so he’s on familiar territory here. However, once again I have to wonder if he wrote this with a straight face, given the creative ways in which Conservapedia deals with untruths – Obama is a Muslim, Dawkins isn’t a professor, Lenski can’t do science, etc. Also note how evolution, global warming and atheism are examples of lies in his mind. It probably justifies his “thou shalt not kill” philosophy – atheists are liars, so it’s ok to hate (and kill) them.

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, blah, blah, blah… 

A “want” or “desire” to acquire or control someone else’s property, up to and including convincing a legislature to be a party to such a desire.

Results of liberal and secular society demands against the Commandments

Eminent domain; heavy progressive taxation; prevention of others to develop their own properties; prevention of the country from exploiting its own resources.

Again with the eminent domain? I wonder if this is a throwback to erstwhile colleague Terry Koeckritz’s family and their eminent domain case? Which was implemented by a Republican town council (or whatever you call it) and made worse by Terry pilfering funds from the family trust (thou shalt not steal). Also eminent domain is hardly executed because somebody desires another piece of land, it’s because that land is in the way of something else, say a road or airport. In fact, all of the examples he uses make no sense. Clearly the last point is having a dip at Obama’s no drilling for oil policy, but what pray tell is Obama coveting? The environment? I think by this point, Brian’s frothing at the mouth had reached the point where he could no longer see his monitor and he’d forgotten the original intention of his rant.

And there you have it – another foundation of religious belief wrung through the ideological mangle of Conservapedia and emerging a sad, twisted, bitter shadow of its former self. As racist bigot Andrew Schlafly says, “Everything is political.” Where Conservapedia is concerned, everything is also utter crap.

About PsyGremlin

PsyGremlin is a former Conservapedia sysop (although the position was earned nefariously), stand up comedian, DJ, and is currently a self-employed financial adviser, who impersonates a responsible adult at least 5 days a week. However, highlighting and poking fun at the crazies out there remains his first love. Well besides pork crackling. And custard. And cricket.
This entry was posted in Brian MacDonald, Conservapedia, Religion and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Karajou’s Kommandments

  1. WWWWolf says:

    Funny thing was, Firefox truncated the tab title as “Karajou’s Komma…”

    Hmm. Have we found the controversial Karajou’s Komma (Komma Karajoueaum, in Latin) of the Conservative Bible?

    OK, I’ll go to sleep now…

  2. Pi says:

    Interesting, I was just reading this http://atheism.about.com/od/tencommandments/a/americanlaw.htm this morning

  3. Black Pelican says:

    Too much time dedicated to this resentful lardass.

    But keep it going!

  4. Genghis says:

    I like how you point out that our ‘mad’ swabbie is undertaking a university course at the taxpayers’ expense because most of these tea party types somehow don’t think that these benefits are government programs. See http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/sarameads_policy_notebook/2011/06/americans_are_confused_about_what_is_a_government_program_and_this_is_relevant_to_education.html

  5. Kels says:

    Thing about the Commandments is there’s an awful lot of “thought police” kinda stuff in there. “The word equals the deed”, and so forth. I know a lot of traditions, including mainline Catholic I believe, hold that thinking about having sex with someone is as much of a sin as actually doing it.

    Pretty effective as a control device, really.

    • PsyGremlin says:

      Exactly! That’s why God is all-knowing and all-seeing – it’s that extra level of protection, so even if the Powers That Be can’t see you doing something bad, the Invisible Man in the Sky will know and smite you. Add in a healthy dose of superstitious ignorance and you’ve got the perfect control mechanism.

  6. Chris says:

    I find it hilarious that Krazyjou here completely misunderstands the ninth commandment, which I’m pretty sure isn’t about “lying” in general, but specifically about perjury…

Comments are closed.