Archive for September, 2008

Obama, McCain, and Religion

September 23, 2008

OK people.  This is ridiculous.  Worrying about a candidate’s religion is about as pointless as worrying about what color unicorn he prefers.  At least unicorns could probably be genetically created by humans, though.

Obama has a “muslim name”?  I wasn’t aware that a person’s name trapped them into a particular god-delusion.  Don’t get me wrong: I despise Obama.  But for GOOD reasons.

Face the facts: Both halves of the OBAMcCAIN* creature are most likely atheists.  They only pretend to worry about the color of their unicorns to please the superstitious voters who don’t care about, or can’t understand, real issues.

The real issue: both halves of the OBAMcCAIN beast are evil, in that their actions harm innocent people.  Both halves advocate theft (they call it “taxation”).  Both halves advocate invading other countries with military forces.  Both halves think it is a good idea to steal from the rich and give to the poor.  Both halves are shying away from saying that government caused this financial meltdown; more government is the last thing that would solve it.  (Get the stupid government out of the way and let the FREE MARKET fix the mess.  It might be painful, but unlike the stupid government plan, it will WORK!)  They are both socialists who believe that society is more important than the individual; ignoring the simple fact that society is made up of individuals.  Hurt them and you harm society.  Once again making them evil.

Voting for OBAMcCAIN is, at best, a pointless waste of your vote.  At worst, it is about the same as voting for Hitler: you, THE VOTER, will share some of the responsibility for the disaster to come.  DON’T DO IT!!!!!

Back to the original subject, no one who truly believes in the supernatural is rational enough to run his own life, much less mine.  Or yours.  So stop forcing them to pretend to believe and start asking them the hard questions on matters of reality.  Discover their socialism, if you dare!


*Yes, I swiped this name


To The Love-Of-My-Life

September 22, 2008

I had a dream about you last night.  I dreamed I was at some kind of a quilt show or something and ran into you and CH (friend from work) in a room full of crafts and quilts.  You hugged me, then burst into tears.  CH said “I guess there are some unresolved issues”.  We just kept holding on to one another while you sobbed.  Then, somehow, I was babysitting our baby daughters and I was watching them play, thinking how cute they were together.  I think you had gone to look at some stuff in a different place at the show.
I woke up with a lump in my throat.  How I wish….. well…. you know.

I Wanted Her SO BAD!

September 18, 2008

Today I went to the gas station to help my dad fill the RV.  There was a girl filling her pick-up truck.  O M G!

Cute cowgirl!  She was roping the trash can while she waited.  Her boots had colorful tops.  (No hat though.  What a shame.) 

I wanted to go over and talk to her SO BAD!  She saw me looking at her and kept doing things that seemed calculated to get my attention.  But my dad was there.  I couldn’t go talk to her without him noticing and wondering why.  I mean, did he SEE her?  What other reason would I need?

So, I originally said that I hope no one ever reads this blog, but now I modify that wish slightly.  Now I wish she would somehow find this and write me.  I’d like to meet her!

Good and Evil

September 16, 2008

I see some religious types claim that “evil” is simply the absence of “good”, just like “dark” is the absence of “light”.  I don’t buy that line. 

 “Evil” is anything that harms innocent people.  The absence of “good” won’t necessarly harm anyone, even if it helps no one either.  But the presence of “evil” certainly harms people.

Evil is much more active than their self-serving description.

There are also neutral actions that neither harm nor help anyone.  These can’t honestly be catagorized as “good” or “evil”.  If I drink a glass of water my action has no moral value at all.  You can’t say it is “good” because it obviously isn’t “evil”, but you also can’t claim it is “evil” because it lacks “good”. 

The reason “evil” is claimed to be the absence of “good” is so that they can claim that “Hell” is the absence of “God”.  They try to keep their metaphores consistent, even if it doesn’t pass a close look.

So, once again, a religious claim is exposed as silly.

What made me think of this was an email I received which was trying to ridicule science.  I will post it here along with my corrections and comments (in red):

God vs. Science

A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, “Let me explain the problem science has with religion.”

The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

“You’re a Christian, aren’t you, son?”
“Yes sir,” the student says.

“So you believe in God?”

“Is God good?”
“Sure! God’s good.”

“Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?”

“Are you good or evil?”
“The Bible says I’m evil.”

The professor grins knowingly. “Aha! The Bible!” He considers for a moment.
“Here’s one for you. Let’s say there’s a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?”
“Yes sir, I would.”

“So you’re good…!”
“I wouldn’t say that.”

“But why not say that? You’d help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn ‘t.”

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. “He doesn’t, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?”
The student remains silent.
“No, you can’t, can you?” the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

“Let’s start again, young fella. Is God good?”
“Er…yes,” the student says.

“Is Satan good?”
The student doesn’t hesitate on this one. “No.”

“Then where does Satan come from?”
The student falters. “From God”

“That’s right. God made Satan, didn’t he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Evil’s everywhere, isn’t it? And God did make everything, correct?”

“So who created evil?” The professor continued, “If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.”
Again, the student has no answer. “Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?” The student squirms on his feet. “Yes.”

“So who created them?”
The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. “Who created them?” There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. “Tell me,” he continues onto another student. “Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?”
The student’s voice betrays him and cracks. “Yes, professor, I do.”

The old man stops pacing. “Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?”
“No sir. I’ve never seen Him.”

“Then tell us if you’ve ever heard your Jesus?”
“No, sir, I have not.”

“Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus?
Have you ever ha d any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?”
“No, sir, I’m afraid I haven’t.”

“Yet you still believe in him?”

“According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?”
“Nothing,” the student replies. “I only have my faith.”

“Yes, faith,” the professor repeats. “And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.”

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. “Professor, is there such thing as heat?”
“Yes,” the professor replies. “There’s heat.”

“And is there such a thing as cold?”
“Yes, son, there’s cold too.”
“No sir, there isn’t.”


(Now the fun- and Christian deception- begins!)

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. “You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up (Don’t you mean “cool down”?) to 458 (wrong.  It is -459.67 F, and has not been attainable) degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.”

“Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold.

Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.” (wrong, it is a relative term only)

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

“What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?”
“Yes,” the professor replies without hesitation. “What is night if it isn’t darkness?”
“You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? (keeps using scientifically meaningless terms)

That’s the meaning we use to define the word.”
“In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?”

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. “So what point are you making, young man?”

“Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.”

The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. “Flawed? Can you explain how?”

“You are working on the premise of duality,” the student explains. “You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God.
You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.”

“It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.

Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.” (wrong.  Death is the ending of life.  Something that has never been alive can not experience “death”)

“Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from monkey? ” (wrong again.  Evolutionary theory is being misrepresented here)

“If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.”

“Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?”
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

“Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?” (wrong.  Evolution makes predictions which can be observed, studied, and measured.  It is falsifiable, which means it would be possible to prove it false if it were not true. Religion does none of these things.)

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

“To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.”

The student looks around the room. “Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?” The class breaks out into laughter.

“Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelt the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.” (But the professor’s brain could be studied with MRI and CAT scans.  Its electrical signature can be measured by electrodes.  During brain surgery it would be confirmed for the onlookers)

“So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?”

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. “I guess you’ll have to take them on faith.” (Nope.  Test it out, using science)

“Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,” the student continues. “Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?”

Now uncertain, the professor responds, “Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.”  (“Evil” such as that which is “God’s plan”.  For example: demanding that a rape victim marry her attacker – Deut. 22:28-29.  There are many more examples, such as God’s wholehearted endorsement of slavery throughout the Bible.  Pure, unadulterated EVIL!)

To this the student replied, “Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.” (Wrong again.  Evil is that which causes harm to the innocent.  It can be an active thing, rather than a passive “lack”.  It is measurable, observable, and in some cases, predictable.  Such as trying to deceive people with creationist “thought”)

The professor sat down. (Might as well, since there is no point in debating delusional people)

Gangs in Schools

September 15, 2008
Someone I know is a principal at a school. He is having problems with wanna-be gang members. They are trying to recruit new members at school. I realize the root of the problem is that public schools should not exist, and the hostile environment for kids is part of the reason they try to find a way to belong by joining the gang. But, given the limitations of the system, what would the libertarian answer to such recruiting be?

I suggest giving the recruiters the choice to stop threatening the other kids or face the full brunt of the Zero Aggression Principle*. I would tell them that in my school, the ZAP is the rule. No one is to initiate, threaten, or delegate force, but once they have, all bets are off. Those who react with self-defensive force against the gang will not be punished in any way. It is almost like declaring “open season” on the gangs.

 * The Zero Aggression Principle: “No human being has the right, under ANY circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, nor to advocate or delegate its initiation.”

The Bible as DNA

September 15, 2008

Just as our physical form comes from our DNA, and more importantly, which DNA is activated, so does the moral form of those who “believe in the Bible” come from which parts of the Bible they choose to “activate”, or that their culture has activated, in their minds.

Most modern Christians (and Jews) don’t “activate” the pro-slavery parts of the Bible. Slave owners are instructed by the Bible how (and how severely) to beat their slaves.  Parents are even given rules for selling their children into slavery.  Only a “pro-slavery God” would worry about making up rules like that.  But don’t worry, slavery can be “kind”: young virgin girls will be spared from certain death if their village is sacked because they can be taken as sex-slaves by God’s warriors.  Isn’t that nice.

Nor do Christians follow Deuteronomy 22:28-29 which insists that a rapist must marry his victim in order to “clean” himself, and must stay with her for the rest of his life.  Who does that really punish?

The Bible gives a long list of people Christians are required to kill: homosexuals, disobedient children, adulterers, people who go to work on Sunday, etc.  God orders his followers to kill the completely innocent babies of their enemies several places in the Old Testament. “Evil” is the act of harming an innocent person.  God is acting for evil in these verses.

The claim that “that is just the Old Testament” falls flat since the Bible says that God is perfect and never-changing.  Plus, the New Testament doesn’t repudiate those evil passages.  Slavery is still accepted by everyone in the New Testament, including Jesus.  (Never mind that the OT and the NT are obviously talking about completely different “Gods”.)

The different denominations and cults arise because of different mutations that activate different parts of the Biblical DNA.  Those involved can’t see this truth, but those outside the box can see it clearly. 

I suppose our civilization is lucky that most of the Bible is “junk DNA” that is no longer active.  We couldn’t survive a real Bible believing culture. 

So while Christians demonize Islam for its evil followers, they would be just as bad if they actually followed the entire Bible as if they believed it.  All religions are equally horrific if taken too seriously.  Even if taken lightly, they are harmful since they are based upon lies and deception and the myths of barbaric bronze-age sheep herders.  The truth is SO MUCH BETTER!

I’m Bad, I guess

September 9, 2008

I don’t know…. maybe I am just a bad person.  It would explain a lot. 

Since I moved, my friends have drifted away.  Few of them keep in touch.  It seems that my attempts to make new friends have failed. 

Because I think ObamcCain is evil and I refuse to vote for it, I am seen as bad. 

I see through the “brother” BS of the military and know it is not “fighting for our freedom”, but fighting to prop up an evil government (there is no other kind). 

I reject religion in all its forms as well. 

God and government: the two most bogus excuses to harm people. 

I need sex. 

I need a human touch.  To admit that also seems to be somehow wrong. 

I am so tired of it all.


September 8, 2008

I am stuck in this miserable relationship.  There is no way out that won’t have horrible consequences.  If I leave her, she will take the baby.  If I stay, I will be miserable and I will cheat the first chance I get.  If I get no chance to cheat, I will die.

I Miss the “Old Me”

September 8, 2008

I really wanna go back to being a Man-Whore.  I miss those days more than I can bear.  I like being that way; I like the excitement of meeting new girls.  I miss it SO MUCH. 

I am not good at monogamy.  I don’t like monogamy.  If I could find a girl who was OK with that, it would be so much better for us both.  As it is… how can I make someone happy when I am in a situation that is so uncomfortable and unnatural for me?

I need a new girlfriend.  Even just an online one.  Someone… ANYTHING to stop this excruciating boredom and desperation.

Feeling Better

September 8, 2008

I have found I feel a lot better about myself when I am around the Psycho less.  Could there be a connection?