Belief vs. Reality?

[Wild Bill]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=199411

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/column....html?id=199495

This excerpt I believe to be particularly telling:

"All of which seems rather unremarkable to state, except for the fact that many people do not think this way. Belief is often treated as a private conclusion, entirely subjective and not generally applicable. It can only be judged on the ground of sincerity, not on right or wrong, true or false."

I submit that part of the reason why we are reading posts from native supporters that seem so flagrantly illogical and over the top is due to the syndrome expressed in these two links. We are arguing with people high on faith, which is usually pointless.

Sadly, it would appear that this means there can never be any common ground. The most that could be achieved would be some sort of uneasy truce, complete with a DMZ between Caledonia and Six Nations.

I'm sure I'll now get scolded from the usual quarters but that of course will have little or nothing to do with what's actually going to happen. I'd love to be proven wrong but we'll have to look back 10 years from now to properly judge.

We might be lucky. People do win lotteries, after all.

Edited January 1, 2008 by Wild Bill

[charter.rights]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=199411

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/column....html?id=199495

This excerpt I believe to be particularly telling:

"All of which seems rather unremarkable to state, except for the fact that many people do not think this way. Belief is often treated as a private conclusion, entirely subjective and not generally applicable. It can only be judged on the ground of sincerity, not on right or wrong, true or false."

I submit that part of the reason why we are reading posts from native supporters that seem so flagrantly illogical and over the top is due to the syndrome expressed in these two links. We are arguing with people high on faith, which is usually pointless.

Sadly, it would appear that this means there can never be any common ground. The most that could be achieved would be some sort of uneasy truce, complete with a DMZ between Caledonia and Six Nations.

I'm sure I'll now get scolded from the usual quarters but that of course will have little or nothing to do with what's actually going to happen. I'd love to be proven wrong but we'll have to look back 10 years from now to properly judge.

We might be lucky. People do win lotteries, after all.

"Common sense is a collection of prejudices you have accumulated by the age of eighteen" Albert Einstein.

Reality is based on a series of perceptions. Change the perception and your reality changes. Reality defines your belief. Change your perceptions and your belief evenutally changes with it.

The problem really is nothing more than a series of myths you have collected since you were a child. Some, like Santa Claus you eventually grow out of. Others you hang on to all your life, right until the brink of death. The myths control and dominate you.

The reality is Natives got screwed in Canada over the years and are still being screwed. If that we're not true then how is it that the governments (all tiers) refuse to consult with Six Nations over development of lands they have an interest in, despite it being the rule of law confirmed byt the Supreme Court of Canada? If the governments weren't afraid of the outcome, resulting in losing control over the land they would be eagerly seeking Six Nations (and other First Nations) input prior to the assignment of development of those lands. But they are afraid, aren't they. Because they know that once the word gets out that they have been screwing natives, it opens the door that maybe you have been getting screwed too. It would reveal that all the myths you hold and protect are false - and without myths to protect you, your world - your reality and belief systems - would fall apart.

There has never been an impasse where Six Nations or the Confederacy has been concerned. So your suggestion that there is one is telling that you are very afraid of your own myths being exposed and are refusing to participate. However, if you look at the real history of Confederacy people you will find a tenaciousness in each individual that provides that when they believe they are right, they will never give up. So you really only have a few choices, either find a way to convince them that they are wrong by providing absolute irrefutable proof that the land claims they are making were handed over legally, and properly and if not hand back lands of equal value; negotiate with them giving them some consultation and accommodation rights over development; or simply acknowledge the cheating and lying by succeeding governments and agents and work together to find a common place in this world recognizing that Canadians cannot move forward without bringing First Nations into an equitable relationship with the rest of Canada. None of what has been tried - the lying, the obfuscation, the buffoonery, the propaganda - has worked for Canada to this point. Something new, like honesty needs to be tried.

I would suggest that if you are operating from a fear position and instilling that fear into your children, you are condemning them to a life of misery, mistrust and bigotry. And since common sense is all the prejudices learned by the age of 18, it would appear that your children are headed for a life of conflict, or of creating conflict just to feel some sort of security. Your reality may very well beyond hope, but if you are smart enough and thoughtful enough, there might just be an opportunity to save your children from YOUR fears.

What you read only appears illogical because you are reading it through an insane and illogical filter. Reality never looks the same to a crazy person as it does one who is wholly sane. And a crazy person never knows he is crazy but thinks that others are illogical.

BTW Happy New Year. I have it on good authority that the land reclamations are going to be ramped up in 2008. Let's hope all goes more peaceful than 2007....and with McHale out of Caledonia for a while it certainly is off to a good start, IMO.

Edited January 1, 2008 by charter.rights

[Kitchener]

One needn't look for such acts as shooting abortion-providers in order to see the bloody consequences of religious conviction. The very successful efforts in the USA to depict GW Bush as a godly (hence, to simplistic reasoners, a moral) man, in spite of masses of evidence of callousness and dishonesty, fairly directly led to a war and occupation so lethal to non-combatants that 9/11 is trivial by comparison.

Even staunchly religious people may shake their heads at the disgusting rhetoric of Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, and regard him as an isolated example of religiously motivated hatred. But when some of those same people came out to vote pro-Bush oin order to prevent gays from marrying, a campaign widely driven by religious organizations with Republican backing (and vice versa), their reasons were no less religious and not much less degenerate than Phelps's, and the consequences of their votes cost immeasurably more in terms of money and innocent lives.

Religious conviction has its bloodiest consequences through the aggregate effects of politely shared prejudice, and not by the one-off acts of extremists.

[Wild Bill]

"Common sense is a collection of prejudices you have accumulated by the age of eighteen" Albert Einstein.

Reality is based on a series of perceptions. Change the perception and your reality changes. Reality defines your belief. Change your perceptions and your belief evenutally changes with it.

What you read only appears illogical because you are reading it through an insane and illogical filter. Reality never looks the same to a crazy person as it does one who is wholly sane. And a crazy person never knows he is crazy but thinks that others are illogical.

BTW Happy New Year. I have it on good authority that the land reclamations are going to be ramped up in 2008. Let's hope all goes more peaceful than 2007....and with McHale out of Caledonia for a while it certainly is off to a good start, IMO.

well, it would help if you actually read what I said and responded to it, rather than jump into some pre-programmed response!

I'LL USE CAPITALS IN THE HOPE THAT YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY LISTEN TO MY WORDS! I WOULD BE WILLING TO CONCEDE THAT ALL THE LAND CLAIMS ARE TRUE AND VALID IN THE NATIVES' FAVOUR! IT WOULD STILL NOT MATTER TO ME ONE WHIT!

IT'S NOT THE CLAIMS! IT'S THE TACTICS! YOU USED THE TOWNSPEOPLE AS CANNON FODDER! TO ME THAT PUTS YOU IN THE SAME CATEGORY AS THE IRA OR SUICIDE BOMBERS! YOUR ZEAL HAS JUST NOT TAKEN YOU THAT FAR DOWN THE PATH, YET!

TO ME, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE THUGS THAT BEAT UP THAT OLD MAN OR WHOEVER BLEW UP THE HYDRO TRANSFORMER AND THE OPP "DEPUTY DAN" WHO SHOT DUDLEY GEORGE! THE MORALITY, OR RATHER LACK OF IT, IS THE SAME!

Now, I wonder if you'll respond to my actual points or once again take me on a tangent with a centuries old history lesson. Sometimes I think I'm listening to a juke box with the same record on every button.

[charter.rights]

well, it would help if you actually read what I said and responded to it, rather than jump into some pre-programmed response!

I'LL USE CAPITALS IN THE HOPE THAT YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY LISTEN TO MY WORDS! I WOULD BE WILLING TO CONCEDE THAT ALL THE LAND CLAIMS ARE TRUE AND VALID IN THE NATIVES' FAVOUR! IT WOULD STILL NOT MATTER TO ME ONE WHIT!

IT'S NOT THE CLAIMS! IT'S THE TACTICS! YOU USED THE TOWNSPEOPLE AS CANNON FODDER! TO ME THAT PUTS YOU IN THE SAME CATEGORY AS THE IRA OR SUICIDE BOMBERS! YOUR ZEAL HAS JUST NOT TAKEN YOU THAT FAR DOWN THE PATH, YET!

TO ME, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE THUGS THAT BEAT UP THAT OLD MAN OR WHOEVER BLEW UP THE HYDRO TRANSFORMER AND THE OPP "DEPUTY DAN" WHO SHOT DUDLEY GEORGE! THE MORALITY, OR RATHER LACK OF IT, IS THE SAME!

Now, I wonder if you'll respond to my actual points or once again take me on a tangent with a centuries old history lesson. Sometimes I think I'm listening to a juke box with the same record on every button.

Or I responded well to your points. Your illogical filter got stuck in the on position.

I did nothing. So you can stop accusing me of something I wasn't involved in. I merely observe what has happened from an objective point of view and from where I sit people like you caused your own problems. YOU gathered together to protest Six Nations occupation of their own lands (under dispute) and went in with ignorance and indignant assertion that YOU had a right to keep natives off that land. For gawd's sake, you don't really own your own land let alone have a right to tell someone they can't occupy their own land. And you ramped it up when you participated in the various rallies further pushing your indignant and raucous behaviors to a degree that the OPP took a stance against you. They realize as do Six Nations people realize that each event becomes more volatile every time McHale shows up. Especially, NO ONE would get hurt IF you didn't show up and try to instigate a retaliation! So stay away and the OPP can guarantee your safety. Show up with the intent to cause mischief and you will be arrested, tried and convicted just like Mr. McHale. You migth get pummled along the way too, but that is what you appear to want.

You say you are projecting your fear on your children. Perhaps, it will get to the point where they will have to grow up without you, when you do something stupid enough out of that fear? Who knows? You could end up in jail as a wife for some brute, or even worse, dead with your children having to pick up the pieces, funeral costs and all. But in any case, none of your bad behaviors does one thing to improve your situation.

As an observer, I see that the McHale-lites are getting more and more aggressive. You will find as I have observed that the Six Nations respondents will get equally more aggressive with each rally. That is their nature and from my position you can't win this tit for tat craziness. The only result will be someone's injury or death. The OPP have ensured that it won't be by their hand...

[kimmy]

Belief isn't a subjective matter

This excerpt I believe to be particularly telling:

"All of which seems rather unremarkable to state, except for the fact that many people do not think this way. Belief is often treated as a private conclusion, entirely subjective and not generally applicable. It can only be judged on the ground of sincerity, not on right or wrong, true or false."

A rather weak essay, in my opinion.

Without the extension of belief into the realm of truth, where it must succeed or fail as a valid account of reality, there can be no basis for true community. Instead, each of us is left alone with his own views, denied the common foundation of a shared apprehension of the truth.

How would it be if scientists did not generalize their principles, seeking to make true statements about nature of reality? There could be no advances in knowledge if nothing could be established as true, no genuine fellowship of scholars. In the realm of philosophy, politics, ethics, morals and theology, the same applies, even though empirical measurement is not one of the tools available.

If there is no empirical means of discerning "true" from "false", then isn't it subjective? By definition?

If there is no empirical means of discerning "true" from "false", Father de Souza's attempt to equate belief to science fails rather badly, as empirical means of validating a hypothesis is the one fundamental characteristic of the scientific method.

-k

[Wild Bill]

A rather weak essay, in my opinion.

If there is no empirical means of discerning "true" from "false", then isn't it subjective? By definition?

If there is no empirical means of discerning "true" from "false", Father de Souza's attempt to equate belief to science fails rather badly, as empirical means of validating a hypothesis is the one fundamental characteristic of the scientific method.

-k

Thank you! You confirmed it for me that the good father's argument was a little weak. He was responding to the main article(s). By definition I guess he is a man of faith and feels he must support that view.

Seems that you too agree with the main article. I cited it to point out how to so many fervent protesters belief trumps truth, as with the videotape clips of native violence taken by CHCH tv and the contrast with the video clip posted on this board purporting to show how Mchale somehow deliberately triggered violence.

It also explains how someone like Cross could shoot a doctor for performing abortions. Or how a suicide bomber could blow up a school yard. Some folks seem to confuse the intensity of their belief with truth. They feel that if they can demonstrate their belief in a stronger fashion that somehow makes it more true.

Scary! People of that persuasion cannot be reasoned with. If a situation boils over you have to react as if to a rabid dog. There's no point in discussion!

[Wild Bill]

Or I responded well to your points. Your illogical filter got stuck in the on position.

As an observer, I see that the McHale-lites are getting more and more aggressive. You will find as I have observed that the Six Nations respondents will get equally more aggressive with each rally. That is their nature and from my position you can't win this tit for tat craziness. The only result will be someone's injury or death. The OPP have ensured that it won't be by their hand...

Who tore down the hydro tower?

Who burned out the hydro transformer and left the area with no electricity for days?

Who beat up that old couple who were driving by?

Who beat up and robbed the CHCH cameramen?

Who beat up the old man in that house under construction?

Who stole the OPP car and tried to run over the officer?

These are only a fraction of what we've all seen. This is why I no longer care if the land claims are valid.

Whatever. This is becoming a badly crossed thread. Your responses however I feel are confirming my initial post so perhaps things are still appropriate.

[charter.rights]

Who tore down the hydro tower?

As far as Iknow all the towers were on the ground, as hydro had been refused entry to erect them.

Who burned out the hydro transformer and left the area with no electricity for days?

No one knows. Yet Iremember that shorty after that happened, someone reported a known OPP informant running away from the station. Police are still investigating. Did YOU do it?

Who beat up that old couple who were driving by?

A guy from out of town

Who beat up and robbed the CHCH cameramen?

The same guy from out of town.

Who beat up the old man in that house under construction?

Since the court case is pending the facts have not yet been presented. The initial reports however, said that he and his nephew confronted and attempted to assault the 3 youths, and he ended up getting the short end of the stick when they turned on him.

Who stole the OPP car and tried to run over the officer?

Since the court case is pending the facts have not yet been presented. It was an New York ATF SUV and the OPP and the ATF guy were trespassing on Six Nations. Why would the OPP invite the ATF?

These are only a fraction of what we've all seen.

Were you a bona fide witness? Maybe you should notify the Crown attorney. If not then your myth is nothing more than a fear you have made up in your own mind - a delusion.

This is why I no longer care if the land claims are valid.

Who cares what you think? Are you a party to the negotiations? Did you sign for, or represent the Crown in any of theses dealings? What you care about is irrelevent. What makes you think your opinion or support counts in any of this? Who died and made you God?

Whatever. This is becoming a badly crossed thread. Your responses however I feel are confirming my initial post so perhaps things are still appropriate.

And yours are proving just how insane and out of touch with reality you really are - a perfect example your holding the belief that you are somehow a Saint that makes you act in irrational ways. I truly feel sorry for your kids. They have a ghoul where a father should be.

[capricorn]

Who cares what you think?

I do. I welcome Wild Bill's thoughts however you want to describe or categorize them. I like the way he converses without resorting to personal insults.

[charter.rights]

I do. I welcome Wild Bill's thoughts however you want to describe or categorize them. I like the way he converses without resorting to personal insults.

Of course like most posts, you have again taken it out of context.

[Borg]

It is nothing more than a money grab.

Follow the money

Tales of belief and religion and rights are not to be believed.

Cash is all they want.

Cut them a cheque and kick them loose. Make it a no kidding final payment. Any later disagreement - jail them. For a long time.

Borg

[Borg]

Snip

This is why I no longer care if the land claims are valid.

Who cares what you think? Are you a party to the negotiations? Did you sign for, or represent the Crown in any of theses dealings? What you care about is irrelevent. What makes you think your opinion or support counts in any of this? Who died and made you God?

You should care - canuckleheads have had it with indians. Lose their support and you lose everything.

Whatever. This is becoming a badly crossed thread. Your responses however I feel are confirming my initial post so perhaps things are still appropriate.

And yours are proving just how insane and out of touch with reality you really are - a perfect example your holding the belief that you are somehow a Saint that makes you act in irrational ways. I truly feel sorry for your kids. They have a ghoul where a father should be.

Harsh words from someone of your ilk. Be that as it may you have the right to speak. Be glad it was awarded to you.

[kengs333]

Who beat up that old couple who were driving by?

A guy from out of town

Who beat up and robbed the CHCH cameramen?

The same guy from out of town.

The guy was an Indian from New York.

Who stole the OPP car and tried to run over the officer?

Since the court case is pending the facts have not yet been presented. It was an New York ATF SUV and the OPP and the ATF guy were trespassing on Six Nations. Why would the OPP invite the ATF?

"Albert Douglas, 30, of Ohsweken, Ont., faces charges of attempted murder, theft of a motor vehicle, dangerous driving, assaulting a police officer, forcible confinement, robbery and two counts of breaching his bail" (ctv.ca)

[kengs333]

The problem really is nothing more than a series of myths you have collected since you were a child. Some, like Santa Claus you eventually grow out of. Others you hang on to all your life, right until the brink of death. The myths control and dominate you.

Funny you should make such an assertion... I was watching "Fish Out of Water" the other day on APTN and the host stopped by Six Nations where visited a Six Nations elder who was tending to her "three sisters garden". This woman made some really strange remarks about having "helpers" in the form of six or seven "sisters" in the form of spirits and mythical "little people" who tend to the garden. She said this with quite a straight face, I might add. She also dresses her squash with raw manure, and even dabbed some with her finger and tasted it (she also coaxed the host into doing it).

So this is basically the state of reality on Six Nations: elders believe that mythical spirits grow their gardens and they go around literally eating s--t--no wonder their children and grandchildren can't deal properly with modern society.

[Kitchener]

So this is basically the state of reality on Six Nations: elders believe that mythical spirits grow their gardens and they go around literally eating s--t--no wonder their children and grandchildren can't deal properly with modern society.

Yeah, that's crazy. Why can't they believe instead that they have personal, private conversations with someone who died a couple thousand years ago, in which they ask an omnipotent spirit to intercede in their diet, personal finances, and football games, and then maybe go to elaborate services where they purport to eat the dead guy's magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood? Then they'd be respectable members of modern society instead of muddled myth-mongers.

[Wild Bill]

"Common sense is a collection of prejudices you have accumulated by the age of eighteen" Albert Einstein.

Reality is based on a series of perceptions. Change the perception and your reality changes. Reality defines your belief. Change your perceptions and your belief evenutally changes with it.

Here we see the inherent difference in how we perceive reality. REALITY IS A CONSTANT! THINGS EXIST! EVENTS HAPPEN AND FACTS DON'T CHANGE BECAUSE YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE THEM OR BEND YOUR MEMORY!

As opposed to thinking that it's all your own perception and that if somehow you can convince people to your view then reality will change to correspond.

What utter tripe! People are entitled to their own opinions but NOT their own set of facts! If you "win" an argument by intimidation reality doesn't change to fit your argument.

Your statement about reality and perception seems cribbed straight from George Orwell's 1984: "Down the memory hole!" and "How many fingers do you see, Smith? If the State says there are five fingers then that's how many there are!"

A = A. The Universe couldn't care less about your perceptions. Facts are facts and actions are actions.

[Wild Bill]

Yeah, that's crazy. Why can't they believe instead that they have personal, private conversations with someone who died a couple thousand years ago, in which they ask an omnipotent spirit to intercede in their diet, personal finances, and football games, and then maybe go to elaborate services where they purport to eat the dead guy's magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood? Then they'd be respectable members of modern society instead of muddled myth-mongers.

Well, I'm hardly a theist of any kind but if I had to choose between a Baptist picnic or any event on Six Nations I'd feel a lot less threatened with the Baptists!

[Kitchener]

Well, I'm hardly a theist of any kind but if I had to choose between a Baptist picnic or any event on Six Nations I'd feel a lot less threatened with the Baptists!

Well, that's an interesting bit of autobiography about you. I've known plenty of Baptists, and would make a different choice than yours. But the fact is, nobody had seen fit to point to non-First-Nations supernatural obsessions as evidence that they are ill-suited for modern life. Which suggests something selectively anti-native about the comment to which I responded.

[kengs333]

Yeah, that's crazy. Why can't they believe instead that they have personal, private conversations with someone who died a couple thousand years ago, in which they ask an omnipotent spirit to intercede in their diet, personal finances, and football games, and then maybe go to elaborate services where they purport to eat the dead guy's magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood? Then they'd be respectable members of modern society instead of muddled myth-mongers.

Personally, I don't pray for victory or help with finances because I know that if I have faith in God, that's all I need; if things don't go the way they ideally should in my vain, mortal way of thinking, then that's just the way it is. I personally don't agree with people who pray for victory in football, war, court, etc. It's complex, though, because people assume all sorts of things about God and Jesus, and this largely stems from being misled or not reading the Bible properly, if at all--I'm guessing one of the latter two applies to you.

I'd rather "[eat] magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood"--as you put it--than literally drink blood and eat human flesh as has been the case with many pagan societies, including Indians.

[kengs333]

Well, that's an interesting bit of autobiography about you. I've known plenty of Baptists, and would make a different choice than yours. But the fact is, nobody had seen fit to point to non-First-Nations supernatural obsessions as evidence that they are ill-suited for modern life. Which suggests something selectively anti-native about the comment to which I responded.

Sorry, what exactly is "anti-Native" about my post. I'm just stating what was in that episode, that's all. I know that all Indians don't think like that, that there are Indians who are good, decent Christians who understand the truth and don't subscribe to such nonsense.

[charter.rights]

Personally, I don't pray for victory or help with finances because I know that if I have faith in God, that's all I need; if things don't go the way they ideally should in my vain, mortal way of thinking, then that's just the way it is. I personally don't agree with people who pray for victory in football, war, court, etc. It's complex, though, because people assume all sorts of things about God and Jesus, and this largely stems from being misled or not reading the Bible properly, if at all--I'm guessing one of the latter two applies to you.

I'd rather "[eat] magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood"--as you put it--than literally drink blood and eat human flesh as has been the case with many pagan societies, including Indians.

I love how you like to generalize. It is so backward country and simplistic. However, since the stories of cannibalism among some indigenous peoples are just "stories" it would seem we need to put a more realistic and current view based on facts and history

So, perhaps we should deduce that Christians are cannibals by this:

Jeffrey Dalmer

It is bad enough that Christians engage in ritual cannibalism and then fundamentalists take it literally.

[Kitchener]

Personally, I don't pray for victory or help with finances because I know that if I have faith in God, that's all I need; if things don't go the way they ideally should in my vain, mortal way of thinking, then that's just the way it is.

Of course millions of Christians do pray for help with their finances, but you did not see fit to single them out for ridicule rather than native spirituality; and even in your case, you purport to have faith in a long-dead man named Jesus. My point is not that you're somehow ill-suited for modern life due to your supernatural beliefs, but that parity of reason demolishes any significant distinction between you and the woman whose beliefs you were ridiculing, on that front.

people assume all sorts of things about God and Jesus, and this largely stems from being misled or not reading the Bible properly, if at all--I'm guessing one of the latter two applies to you.

You'd have to think so, wouldn't you?

I'd rather "[eat] magically incarnated flesh and drink his blood"--as you put it--than literally drink blood and eat human flesh as has been the case with many pagan societies, including Indians.

It's not "how I put" so much as basic Catholic doctrine of the transubstantiation. Yet you managed not to single out Catholics as maladapted from modern life. Curious, huh? More to the point, unless the woman of whom you wrote (and actual First Nations people in recent history) "literally drink blood and eat human flesh", then this is a particularly bizarre red herring. Impugning Canadian First Nations people by hysterically citing things they don't do is a pretty amazingly weird way of trying to defend your claims.

[Kitchener]

Sorry, what exactly is "anti-Native" about my post. I'm just stating what was in that episode, that's all. I know that all Indians don't think like that

At this point a retraction, apology, and commitment to rethink your attitudes would make more sense than such an Orwellian attempt to rewrite your posting history. Look again at what you wrote. (I mean, actually wrote, as opposed to what you now wish you had written -- talk about beliefs undermining reality!)

this is basically the state of reality on Six Nations: elders believe that mythical spirits grow their gardens and they go around literally eating s--t--no wonder their children and grandchildren can't deal properly with modern society.

[kengs333]

I love how you like to generalize. It is so backward country and simplistic. However, since the stories of cannibalism among some indigenous peoples are just "stories" it would seem we need to put a more realistic and current view based on facts and history

So, perhaps we should deduce that Christians are cannibals by this:

Jeffrey Dalmer

It is bad enough that Christians engage in ritual cannibalism and then fundamentalists take it literally.

Speaking of "backward country and simplistic"...

Cannibalism among Indians is not "just 'stories'" rather is documented archeologically using the same archeological methods that have revealed other aspects of Indian culture that Indian activists use to reconstruct a culture that they can identify with.

Again, I would argue that you don't really understand Christianity if you decide to make such assertions about Jeffrey Dalmer being Christian. First of all, as your link suggests, Dalmer was a homosexual; homosexuality is a sin by Christian standards, and this really disqualifies him as being a Christian. The fact that he would then become a cannibal because he supposedly was resentful of the fact that he was a sinner is not an excuse; there is never any justification for becoming like that, and resorting to such evil is the result of being evil--not being Christian.

Needless to say, the fact that you can make such assertions about Christianity just reveals what darkness you yourself harbour.