Does Israel Actually Want Peace?

It’s a fair question. Because nearly every time Israel is presented with a real opportunity, it seems to turn, instead, to violence.

Israel’s latest misadventure was soundly criticized this past Sunday by former Secretary of State Zbigniew Brzezinski during an appearance on Fareed Zakaria’s Global Public Square. When asked if the Israeli invasion of Gaza was a wise move, he pulled no punches. “No,” he said, “When Hamas accepted the notion of participation in the Palestinian leadership, it, in effect, acknowledged the determination of that leadership to seek a peaceful solution with Israel. That was a real option. They should have persisted in that. Instead, Netanyahu launched a campaign of defammation against Hamas, seized on the killing of three Israeli kids to immediately charge Hamas with having done it without any evidence, and has used that to stir up public opinion in Israel in order to justify this attack in Gaza which is so lethal. I think he is isolating Israel. He is endangering its long-range future, and I think we ought to make it very clear that this is a course of action that we thoroughly disapprove, that we do not support, and which may compel us and the rest of the international community to take somes steps of legitimizing Palestinian aspirations, perhaps in the UN.”

In other words, instead of seeking peace with his neighbors through negotiation and conciliation, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was looking for an excuse to militarily destroy his enemies. He claims that the military operation is limited with pinpoint strikes. If it is, then the Israelis have been targeting civilians and children since they represent the majority of the casualties. In doing so, Netanyahu is continuing the never-ending cycle of violence thereby ensuring that the conflict will continue for many more generations.

Not that violence in the territory is anything new. Jews, Arab Muslims and Christians have occupied and fought over the land for millenia with the Israelis being emboldened by their religious doctrine. They claim that they are the “chosen people” and that Jerusalem and the “Holy Land” was a gift from God…a claim that makes sharing the territory all but impossible. In fact, the modern State of Israel was a gift from the British Empire and the United Nations Partition Plan. Out of a sense of guilt following World War II, the UN drew up borders creating the Jewish State of Israel and the Arab State of Palestine.

However, re-drawing borders and relocating people has seldom led to a peaceful coexistence. Not in Israel. Not in Iraq. Not in Ukraine.

Israel’s military control of Gaza, by fencing its borders, blockading its ports and controlling everyone and everything that enters or leaves Gaza has turned it into what is, in effect, the world’s largest and most populous prison. It has not only created economic hardships for Palestinians. It has robbed them of hope. That’s a situation that simply cannot end well.

As for the notion that Israel will eventually agree to a two-state solution, one has to ask, which two states? Israel has already claimed all of Jerusalem for itself. It has accelerated settlements on the West Bank to the point that almost nothing is left for Palestinians. It continues to delay peace negotiations to allow the settlements to continue. It even called upon the US to block Palestine’s membership in the UN. All of this has been pushed by conservative Tea Party-like politicians who are even to the right of Netanyahu, powerful Jewish lobbying groups in the US and certain evangelical US churches who believe that the removal of Arabs from the “Holy Land” will hasten the coming of the new Messiah.

Fortunately, these groups don’t seem to represent the majority sentiment of the Israeli and American people. A number of Jewish organizations are dismayed by the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza. The Jewish Voice for Peace is calling for the US to stop funding the on-going massacre in Gaza. And the Jewish organization, J Street, has long called for moderation and a two-state solution. These groups seem to understand that peace cannot be achieved until each side recognizes the rights and circumstances of the other. Palestinians must recognize the historical claims of the Jews and Israel’s right to exist. Conversely, Israel must recognize the historical claims of the Arabs and the ongoing hardships for the Palestinian people.

But a recent article in the New Republic detailing Secretary of State John Kerry’s attempt to negotiate peace between the two sides reveals the depth of the problem.

Why Does The Right Feel Free To Interpret Science But Not The Constitution And The Bible?

If anything, it should be the other way around. The Bible is not only full of contradictions. Most of it was written hundreds of years after the events it portrays, and it has lost meaning with each translation. As for the Constitution, not even its authors thought it was infallible. Indeed, the Founders expected it to be modified regularly. Jefferson even suggested that it be revisited every generation. And the Constitution addressed the principles and issues of the time. The Founders could not have imagined the issues of today.

As a result, both the Bible and the Constitution may be interpreted in a myriad of ways.

Science, on the other hand, is based entirely on evidence. Science takes a hypothesis and tests it in order to determine if the principle is correct. Only when the results have been repeated on multiple occasions does science accept the hypothesis as fact. For example, gravity was once considered a theory, but every experiment and observation proved it to be true, so it is now accepted as fact. The same is true of evolution and human-caused climate change. In each case, there is an abundance of evidence. Yet conservatives continue to challenge the principles with a few anecdotal experiences based on personal opinion.

In other words, on these issues and many others, conservatives have things backward.

Conservatives continually want to replace science and other evidence with opinion to suit their own ideologies. For instance, they deny the positive impact of Keynesian economics which has been proven by economists on multiple occasions. Instead, they want to rely on Reaganomics which has never proven to work. Even the two architects of Reagan’s trickle down theory have abandoned the concept as a failure and a fraud.

Conservatives actually believe that the poor are lazy despite the fact that most work full-time jobs. Conservatives believe that giving tax breaks and subsidies to large corporations will actually increase federal revenue and create jobs. Conservatives believe that using contraceptives makes women sluts. They believe that preaching abstinence to teens prevents unwanted pregancies despite all evidence to the contrary. They believe that defunding abortion, denying food stamps and school lunch programs for children and declaring war halfway around the world makes them “pro-life.”

Conservatives deny that our national obsession with coal, gas and oil is destroying our planet despite the findings of the world’s most respected climatoligists and evidence of the rapid melting of the planet’s largest glaciers. Conservatives believe that allowing industries to police themselves will maintain our environment. Conservatives believe that allowing the wealthy and large corporations to influence elections is protecting freedom of speech.

There’s a word for such people…and it’s not conservative. It’s delusional!

Proof That Racism Is As Rampant And Repugnant As Ever.

In writing the majority decision that struck down key portions of the Voting Rights Act, Chief Justice Roberts stated, “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.” That’s the same uniformed and misguided mindset that the Court has used to strike out against affirmative action, to endorse religious discrimination, and to rule that corporations have the same rights as individuals.

To educate himself, Justice Roberts need only read the recent article by Braden Goyette and Alissa Scheller published by Huffington Post. It’s so concise, so clear that even Roberts and his conservative co-conspirators should be able to understand it. In the article, the authors present 15 charts that clearly demonstrate that the US is far from a post-racial society. In fact, racial discrimination may be more prevalent, if less obvious and less violent, than it was on the day LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act.

To wit, Blacks held just 2.7 percent of the nation’s wealth in 2010 while comprising 13 percent of the population. The racial wealth gap has ballooned from $85,070 in 1984 to $236,500 in 2009. Blacks are three times more likely to be arrested for drug possession than whites, despite the fact that white Americans use drugs more than blacks. Black men receive prison sentences that are 19.5 percent longer than those of white men who commit similar crimes. Blacks seeking jobs are more likely to be turned away based on the sound of their names and the belief that they use drugs.

The discrimination even extends to pre-school where black students are punished more frequently and more harshly for their behavior.

Of course, if you ask people if they are racist, most will vehmently deny that they hold racist views. In fact, they just use different names for their racism. Today’s racists are more passive-aggressive than in the past. They claim not to discriminate against skin color. It’s just that they dislike those who have “values,” religions and cultural traits that are different than their own. They assume that the problems faced by people of color are of their own making; that they just don’t work hard enough (if they work at all), study hard enough or pray hard enough (at least not to the right god or in the right church).

They dwell on anecdotal evidence of the tiny percentage of people of color who abuse welfare, food stamps and other safety net programs while ignoring the vast majority who work long hours and multiple jobs. At the same time, they ignore the disability fraud, welfare fraud and Medicare fraud committed by white people. They call for harsher sentences for drug crimes and petty crimes while applauding the white collar criminals who take advantage of the lax oversight of our regulatory commissions and loopholes in our tax codes. They fume about the dark-skinned illegal immigrants who walk hundreds of miles across deserts in search of a better life while dismissing the 40 percent of largely white illegal immigrants who simply drive or fly across our borders and overstay their visas.

Despite all of this, America is changing. It is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. And here’s the really bad news for racists. Our electorate is changing. In a few decades, voters of color will outnumber white voters. If whites don’t change their racist views and embrace diversity (I’m looking at you, Teapublicans), payback could be a bitch.

Conservative “Values.”

Whenever I hear someone talk about “values,” I silently prepare myself to endure yet another lecture about religion, hard work, freedom and patriotism. That’s because conservatives assume that they are the only ones who appreciate such things – the only ones who admire hard work, dedication to family and the benefits of living in the US.

Conservatives talk about religion, but they spout hateful ideas. They talk about freedom, but they want to discriminate against those who look different and those with whom they disagree. They talk about hard work, but they refuse to see others rewarded for it. They talk about getting the government off their backs, but they don’t want anyone to touch their Medicare or Social Security. They rail against illegal immigrants while denying equality to the First Americans. They spout quotes from the Founding Fathers, but ignore the statements from those Founders with whom they disagree.

They talk about patriotism, even as they are at war with our federal government.

For the so-called “values voters,” everything is black or white; us against them; Christians against heathens; fiscal conservatives against spendthrifts; cut-and-save against tax-and-spend. There simply is no room for middle ground. As stated by former president George W. Bush, “you’re either with us, or against us.”

I suspect this will fall on deaf ears, but here’s some news for conservatives. Caring for and helping others is a value. Negotiating peace is a value. Showing compassion for those less fortunate than yourself is a value. Leaving the environment in the same shape you found it is a value. Helping to educate others is a value. Honoring knowledge and accomplishment is a value. Tolerance for other lifestyles, ideas and religions is a value. Moderation and compromise are values. And you can be patriotic without waving the flag, shouting “USA” or supporting yet another war.

I understand, dear conservatives, that these may be distasteful and foreign concepts to you. But these are values shared by most of the developed world. In fact, your “values” of greed, anger, hate and intolerance are reviled by most of those who are educated and enlightened. You remember who used those words to describe themselves and their aspirations, don’t you? We refer to them as the Founding Fathers.

What Is Patriotism?

On this Independence Day weekend, movoto.com published a map showing the most and the least patriotic states in America. I might not have paid it any heed except for the fact that it ranked my former state of Minnesota at #49. The criteria used included the number of National Historic Landmarks per capita (WTF?), the number of veterans per capita, money spent to fund veterans, percentage of residents who voted in the last presidential election, people who use Google to buy American flags (double WTF?) and people who list America as an interest on Facebook (triple WTF?).

Obviously, the realtors who constructed the map have no clue of the true meaning of patriotism.

My ancestors fought in all of America’s wars going back to the Revolution. Many could be considered war heroes. Yet there were no showy displays of flags. They paid tribute to other veterans and to the nation, but to my knowledge, they never received nor expected special treatment for their own courage. Most were also religious, but they never made a show of their faith nor tried to force their beliefs onto others.

In short, they were true patriots.

All of this reminds me of an essay contest I was asked to judge a few years ago. It consisted of judging essays on patriotism written by a middle school class. Despite the many grammatical errors and spelling errors, the worst aspect of the competition was the fact that the children seemed to equate patriotism with flag-waving and our military might. The essays focused on war…on defending our freedom from outside interests. But there was no mention of defending our freedom from those inside our nation who would try to take away our rights. There was no mention of devotion to our nation, its principles and its Constitution. There was no mention of our responsibility to vote; to pay our fair share of taxes; to conserve our nation’s beauty; to conserve our environment. No mention of ensuring equal rights for all of our citizens.

Knowing then what I know now, I shouldn’t have been surprised. On movoto.com’s list, Arizona ranked #10 for patriotism. But, in my view, what passes for patriotism in Arizona today is far too much about show…displaying flags and military toys…than substance. By itself, a flag is just a few scraps of colored cloth. It’s what the flag stands for that is really important. Unfortunately, that fact is lost on far too many people. Some of the people who wave the flag the most and shout USA the loudest disavow our federal government. Some would deny others the right to vote, the right to control their own body and the right to marry whom they love. Some destroy signs of their political opponents. Some vandalize property of those who display election materials for the “wrong” candidates. Some shout angry epithets at members of other political parties. Some threaten and bully those who display political stickers with which they disagree. Some carry the Gadsen flag and openly carry guns in order to intimidate their fellow citizens. Some fly the battle flag of the Confederacy and make racist threats. Some cheat or refuse to pay taxes in order to deny funding for the government. All the while, like most of the South, the State of Arizona receives far more in federal funds than it pays in taxes.

Minnesota, on the other hand…the state that ranked #49 in patriotism on movoto.com’s list…leads the nation in voting. It pays a far larger share of income taxes than it receives in federal funding. Indeed, Minnesotans create a disproportionate number of jobs nationally and pay a disproportionate amount in taxes. Minnesotans played a key role for the North in the Civil War. On the other hand, the state that was ranked most patriotic by movoto.com is South Carolona…the first state to secede from the Union and to declare war on the United States.

Now tell me, which state is really more patriotic?

Vengeance Is Mine?

In Romans 12:19, Bible readers are warned, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’” Apparently that message is lost on most so-called Christians in the US. After all, we rank among the top five nations for executions. We also lead the world in total number of prisoners, as well as the percentage of our population that is incarcerated.

To show the disconnect between Christ’s teachings and his conservative followers, consider the Republican primary debates of 2012. Many conservatives who count themselves as “Christians” loudly cheered Texas governor Rick Perry when he responded to the question if he ever lost sleep over his state’s large number of executions by saying, “I’ve never struggled with that at all.”

In fact, we should all lose sleep over our policies of incarceration, solitary confinement and executions. Modern DNA testing has shown that 4 percent of the prisoners kept in isolation on death row are, in fact, innocent. That begs the question, “How many innocent people have been executed in the past?” How many more will be killed as the result of sanctioned, pre-meditated murder by the states?

These killings are not going to change the crimes committed by the prisoners. They do not save money. (Studies have shown that it costs 10 times as much to execute a prisoner as to imprison them for life.} They do not even deter other crimes. One study after another has shown that the death penalty does not prevent murders. So why do we continue to sentence people to death? Why are more than 3,000 Americans sitting on death row?

In a word, revenge.

Revenge is also the reason we continue to sentence children to prison for relatively minor crimes. Oh, that’s right…we’re forbidden to call it prison. It’s “juvenile detention.” And these children are not placed in cells. They are in “rooms” or “dormitories.” Likewise, these children are not subjected to punishment. They are subjected to “safety and security measures.” In reality, we’re simply introducing these children to the prison system at an early age. And we’re teaching them how to be real criminals. You can read more in Nell Bernstein’s Burning Down The House.

What then, you may ask, should we do with children who have committed serious crimes? There’s a new movement that has shown to have much better results than punishment. It’s the system of Restorative Justice. In this system, the children are required to meet and talk with the victims of their crimes. They are required to explain their actions. They are forced to hear and see the consequences of those actions. Then the children and their victims negotiate an equitable restitution. Only if they are defiant or refuse to participate are they sent through the traditional, punishment-oriented system.

Our system of revenge often has racial and profit motives. Private prisons are quite profitable – the more prisoners, the greater the profits. (An example of the effects of this is “Kids for Cash” scheme involving two Pennsylvania judges.) And revenge is easier to commit against someone who looks different than you. That’s why our prison populations are disproportionately minorities.

Of course, revenge is not limited to our justice system. It’s the cause of most wars. Israel is notorious for disproportionate revenge killings, such as the current bombing campaign against Gaza. Muslim extremists have committed thousands of atrocities based on offenses against Islam both real and imagined. And the US? Revenge and greed were the key components in our genocide of Native Americans. Revenge for what was falsely perceived as an attack on the USS Maine led to the Spanish-American War. Revenge and misunderstandings led to World War I. And revenge was the motive for our involvement in Afghanistan. Worse, our expectation of a threat is what led us to pre-emptively strike Iraq, and the Middle East is now suffering the consequences.

Certainly, a venegeful response is sometimes necessary as in the case of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. But we all would be a lot better off if our justice system and our government leaders practiced the advice often given to toddlers. Take a few deep breaths and consider the consequences of your actions. Will revenge really accomplish justice? Or will it simply satisfy the more animalistic and weakest aspects of our beings?

Time To Rethink The Language Of Hate.

Following the murder of two Las Vegas cops and a “good guy with a gun,” it’s time to take a long look at those who are fomenting anti-government hate. The shooters, Jerad and Amanda Miller, had apparently been inspired by Cliven Bundy, as well as various militias and “patriot” groups. They believed the police officers to be Nazis and talked of a revolution against our government.

Far from being alone, the Millers are part of a growing segment of our population who have a perverse understanding of our Constitution, and who consider our government illegitimate. Since the election of President Obama, the non-partisan Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has noted a significant rise in such hate groups. A spokesman said that the SPLC’s Hatewatch had listed 139 hate groups in 2008, but over the last 5 years, the number has grown to more than a thousand.

Interestingly, these groups only seem to thrive during Democratic administrations.

The growth of hate groups is almost certainly the result of the constant anti-government, anti-Democrat hatred being spewed by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and many others. It’s even worse these days with the impact of social media and the Tea Party. Even so-called “traditional” Republicans and “Christian” churches must be held responsible for their words. These people have questioned the legitimacy of a president twice elected with large majorities. Instead of respecting the results of the elections, they have implied that there was widespread voter fraud. They have demonized gays, lesbians, Latinos, African-Americans, the unemployed and the poor.

They have called Obama the “Imperial President” simply for acting on his campaign promises. They called him a Nazi, a Socialist and a Communist (it’s clear they don’t understand the definitions of any of those terms) for signing into law a version of Romneycare. They have celebrated mockumentaries created by James O’Keefe that purported to show progressive groups participating in illicit activities. They have invented conspiracies and scandals over events similar to those they supported or ignored during Republican administrations. They rant about the growth of government even though cutbacks at every level of government have acted as an anchor on our economy since the start of the Great Recession.

The hatemongers have generated such a large following that it now threatens to explode in a new wave of violence.

Rather than being outliers such as Timothy McVeigh, the hate-spewing extremists have taken over one of our two dominant political parties. The haters have members of Congress, presidential candidates, militias led by retired peace officers, Tea Party groups calling for Second Amendment remedies, a cable “news” network making up lies and supporting seditionists, churches screaming hate-filled tirades at minorities, and bullies openly carrying AK-47s, AR-15s and shotguns into restaurants and large retail stores.

Thankfully, the SPLC has finally convinced the Justice Department to reinstate its domestic terrorism unit that was disbanded following 9/11. After all, terrorism is no less lethal if it comes from within. In many ways, domestic terrorism is more destructive than that imposed on us by foreign groups. It makes us distrust and fear each other. Our political system was founded on the debate of ideas; of the party in power being challenged by the loyal opposition. But if we don’t de-escalate the rhetoric that inspires people like the Millers, this isn’t going to end well.

Tea Party Is Just Another Version Of Posse Comitatus.

Posse Comitatus is from Latin, meaning “power of the community.” As you might expect, the modern organization by that name rejects the authority of the federal government and any form of taxes. Its roots go back to the origins of our country and it blossomed briefly during the Great Depression. After fading into oblivion for decades, the group was given new life in 1970 by William Porter Gale who combined his anti-government beliefs with Christian Identity and racism. This modern version believes that blacks are subhuman and that Jews are children of Satan.

Posse Comitatus operated largely beneath the radar until Posse Comitatus follower, Gordon Kahl, murdered two federal marshals in North Dakota in 1983. Following that, the movement once again faded from public view. But those who share the group’s anti-government beliefs spawned numerous offshoots following the financial crisis of 2008.

Those include the Sovereign Citizens movement, various “Patriot” groups, and the Tea Party.

That fact was made abundantly clear by Tea Party support for Cliven Bundy’s confrontation with the Bureau of Land Management. Not only did the Tea Party’s greatest apologists – from Sean Hannity to Rush Limbaugh – use the incident to attack the federal government. Numerous Tea Party-backed militias (including military veterans) and politicians raced to Bundy’s side for photo ops and media statements. They turned Bundy into a poster child for their ideology.

Like Posse Comitatus, the Tea Party isn’t out to merely change our government. It’s out to destroy it!

For example, both the Tea Party and Posse Comitatus believe that all of the lands within a state’s borders should be under state control. They do not recognize federal authority over national parks, national forests and other government lands. They despise the Federal Reserve, and they believe we should return to the gold standard. They believe that the federal government has no authority to impose income taxes, capital gains taxes, estate taxes or any other kind of taxes. In fact, they don’t recognize the federal government at all.

They believe in the nullification of all federal laws. They believe county sheriffs are the only legitimate law. They collect large stores of weapons and ammunition. They refuse to comply with any court orders. And they threaten to exercise their Second Amendment rights to prevent the government from enforcing those orders.

All the while they wave the American flag and call themselves “patriots.”

The good news is that most Americans are finally beginning to recognize the Tea Party for what it really is…a hate group. In fact, a recent Gallup poll found that the Tea Party’s favorability rating has dropped to an all-time low of just 22 percent. That may explain why Tea Party candidates were soundly thrashed in this past week’s Republican primaries. Of course, it has become increasingly difficult to tell a Republican from a Tea Party candidate. Nevertheless, it appears the influence of these nitwits is finally waning.

Good riddance!

Why Religion Is Failing.

In many European nations, churches and cathedrals stand empty, saved from the wrecking ball only because of their historic value. In some cities, the buildings are occupied by tourist information centers; by clothing stores; by shopping malls; by nightclubs; even by strip clubs. Given the current sad state of affairs exhibited by many religions, this should come as no surprise to anyone.

Contrary to the numbskulls on Fox News Channel, it has nothing to do with any perceived “attack on religion.” Rather it is the consequence of self-destruction; of religions actively causing harm to themselves.

In many countries once dominated by the Roman Catholic Church, people have left the Church, horrified by the Vatican having turned a blind eye to sexual predators who have worn the trappings of priests. Many young people have abandoned other denominations due to a lack of relevance in their lives. Many accurately see churches as little more than tax-free social clubs. And many are disturbed by the tendancy of church leaders to engage in politics and to promote misguided, often provably false beliefs. The recent speech by James Dobson at what was billed as a nonpartisan, nondenominational National Prayer Breakfast is a perfect case in point. During his speech, Dobson labeled President Obama “the abortion president,” calling him responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent, unborn children. As a result, a Democratic Congresswoman understandably spoke up and walked out.

She should have known better than to have attended in the first place.

Dobson has long been a shill for political conservatives. He views himself as a kingmaker amongst conservatives. He has immersed himself in organizations devoted to passing legislation that discriminates against those he dislikes. Indeed, one of his groups was behind the discriminatory bill known as Arizona SB 1062…a bill that has been signed into law in Mississippi and elsewhere. Dobson is one of the evangelicals whose primary message is believe as I do…or else.

Dobson is but one of the many church leaders who regularly cross the line and use their status as “spiritual leaders” to sway politics. Many “pastors” have turned their pulpits into venues for political action. They have proselytized as much about politics as Biblical concepts. They have urged their followers to vote for candidates who meet their own narrow-minded views. They have rallied their flocks to support violence. They have turned military interventions into holy wars. They reject science and secular education. They cynically use natural disasters as examples of the failings of our society. They obscure the real teachings of Christ and selectively choose passages from Biblical texts to attack homosexuality and the poor.

And that’s just the Christians. Muslims and Jews have done much of the same and worse!

Given how far many religions have degenerated, it’s little wonder that more and more people, especially educated young adults, describe themselves as not being attached to any religion. It’s why traditional churches are shrinking. And, although some evangelical churches have seen growth based on a strong anti-abortion, anti-gay message, the overall trend is downward. Enlightened leaders such as Pope Francis may be able to reverse that trend, but it’s doubtful. Those leaders are outnumbered and out-shouted by Dobson and his ilk.

A New Understanding Of Life And Death.

After studying ancient Hebrew with an old Jewish rabbi, a friend once told me that the ancient term for God or Yaweh is pronounced “huuah,”…similar to the sound one makes when exhaling forcefully. He said that, in addition to being defined as God, it also means “breath.” My understanding of the Buddhist tradition is that consciousness is centered on the self; that by focusing on the consciousness, individuals may become one with the universe and choose the circumstances of their reincarnation. And my understanding of the Taoist tradition is that individuals do not exist on their own, but that they are part of the greater whole.

Each of these ancient traditions seem to align with a scientist’s new-found understanding of life and death.

In his book “Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the Nature of the Universe,“ Dr. Robert Lanza offers a new concept of life, theorizing that life does not end when the body dies. It can last forever. And Lanza is most certainly not a mad scientist. In fact, he was voted “the 3rd most important scientist alive” by the NY Times and he was named “one of the 100 most influential people alive” by Time magazine. An expert on regenerative medicine and scientific director of Advanced Cell Technology Company, Lanza achieved recognition for his research on stem cells and cloning. More recently, he has focused on the connection between biology, physics, quantum mechanics and astrophysics.

This led Lanza to develop the theory of “biocentrism,” which holds that, rather than life and consciousness being a product of the universe. It’s the other way around. The universe is actually the product of consciousness. He theorizes that intelligence existed before matter…from the beginning of time. Without delving too deeply in the most wonkish details of Lanza’s presentation, I’ll try to summarize it by saying that some scientists have determined that consciousness exists within the microtubules of our brain cells, which process information. They argue that our experience of consciousness is the result of the effects of quantum gravity on these microtubules. When you die, the information is released from your body. But rather than vanish, the information simply dissipates into the universe.

Lanza’s theory holds that most people identify too closely with their bodies. They believe that when the body decays, their consciousness disappears, too. But Lanza theorizes that the body is more like a radio receiving programming signals. When the body (the radio) dies, the information and consciousness (the signals) still exist…much like the Taoist belief that when living things die, they remain part of the whole.

In addition, Lanza believes that there are multiple universes; that the body can be dead in one universe and continue to exist in another. The thought is that, rather than going to a heaven or hell, upon death our consciousness (or soul) may travel to a parallel universe…that we live on indefinitely in one universe after another similar to the Buddhist belief in reincarnation.

All of this may seem like science fiction. But Lanza’s theory is supported by other physicists and astrophysicists who contend that no physical laws exist which would prohibit the existence of parallel worlds. And corresponding with western religious traditions, some scientists even believe that our actions may determine the future and destination of our consciousness.

For as long as I can remember, people have thought that religious philosophy and science are irreconcilably at odds. But, as it turns out, they may share many of the same ideas. They simply arrive at them in differing ways.