Tuesday, December 28, 2010

The fearless and the wicked

The wicked are fearless for they have no demons, no devils, no judging spirits, and nothing waiting for them in death to inflict eternal pain and suffering. This is not true about everyone who fears no god or demon. The truly evil are the ones who know how to use fear to control others, especially fear of Hell.

It is not they who know nothing of the existence of a soul or a god who are the wicked. The wicked are they who enslave pride, boldness, and skepticism in others with talk of devils, demons and eternal pain and suffering. The wicked are they who walk in the shadow of a jealous and angry myth, forcing open purse, wallet and entire estates with threats of damnation.

Wickedness is boundless in those who know enough of theology to act with impunity in lying to their followers about mystical creatures and terrifying places, fear mongering for their financial gain.

Fearlessness and skepticism is terrifying to those who require fear as a tool of control and financial gain, so they vilify the humanist, the skeptical, and atheists.

The truly evil guild the ceilings of their chambers with the gold from the teeth of their followers.

Sunday, December 5, 2010

Will they ever learn?

Has the economy not proven itself the lesson that religion does not benefit its practitioners? Religion only benefits those who pull the rug out from beneath others who spend time looking up, instead of looking around.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

The GPS Effect

I have a TomTom GPS device. I use it all the time, even when I go places to which I know the direction.

I have a long commute to work, about forty minutes, and the first few times I used my TomTom to get where I needed to go. I used it for a crutch after that because I wanted to know exactly how much time I had to stop at a gas station, because TomTom can be programmed to calculate the desired time of arrival, then tell you your window of time as you travel.

During the trip, TomTom would interrupt me when I was going too fast, or tell me I was within a few miles of the exit or I needed to take. Knowing this, I was able to think more thoroughly about other things as I drove, knowing that I would be interrupted at appropriate times.

Very quickly the commute seemed much shorter and actually more enjoyable, to the point where I was intrigued by the effect it had on my perception of time's passage.

Thinking about this I was reminded of my studies, my accidental college library adventure, stumbling upon the subjects of reality construction, cognitive dissonance theory, and operant conditioning. This effect was a perfect example of how sometimes we allow ourselves to be molded into a routine to such a degree that we don't see the things around us that affect our lives, especially to the point of the economic collapse we face today.

I think my GPS allowed me the freedom to consider what was happening to our minds. Would most people experience the same results? Would such a concept be replaced by thoughts of celebrities or sports instead, brain candy for the masses?

Does the Matrix have you?

Tuesday, May 18, 2010


This blog is in response to the article "Dove proposes less-severe noise law" in the State Journal Register

In the comments at the SJ-R website I continue to suggest ad nauseum that the products with no other purpose but to generate loud sound, interfering with the peace and tranquility of the community, be taxed. I will therefore make a direct appeal.

The lack of response will indicate that some laws are aimed at symptoms rather than causes, which means that the intent of those laws is to retain punishment and its related bureaucracy, instead of aiming at a problem that might result in no longer needing that bureaucracy. In other words, some laws are created for the benefit of making busy-work to keep someone in a job that might otherwise be eliminated because a problem was solved by dealing directly with a problem rather than its symptoms alone.

A high recidivism rate, for example, is symptomatic of certain laws benefiting bureaucratic perpetuity rather than solutions.

This noise ordinance serves as a perfect example, focusing at the act of public nuisance rather than the key components that instigate such nuisances.

All crimes are symptoms of greater problems, but the laws of the land are fixed in a psychological medium of stone solid dogma. This dogmatic approach to the law is known in communication circles as "argumentum ad antiquitatem" or an appeal to tradition, a logical fallacy rationalized under the wildly conservative and blatant term "precedence."

The worship of precedence should be a determining factor of failure to pass the bar exam or denial of public service employment. In other words, anyone who refuses to question old law should not be allowed to serve as a judge. That includes the bible. Preachers who do not engage in questions or debate about old laws in any ancient tome, are unworthy of the pulpit, just as any judge is unworthy of the bench, who refuses to doubt a law on a regular basis.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Dead and dying

One wrench in the toolbox of religious mind-control is the power of clergy to look you in the eye and tell you that a deceased love-one is somewhere unpleasant.

They can tell you where you might go too after you die, if you don't obey the rituals and other demanded personal sacrifices in the form of time, money and flesh.

The funeral industry too has tapped the goldmine of grief and obsession. One funeral service radio advertisement on WMAY has the slogan "just because a life has ended doesn't mean the relationship has." This commercial reinforcement of obsession with someone who is now gone forever should force you to recognize that such an obsession is unhealthy.

When you're an atheist, death is the end. Living people learn from the actions and consequences of those who passed away, and then move on with their lives. You're not going to be haunted by grandma for not visiting her grave.

Ghosts are completely bogus. Believing that there is the potential for your "spirit" to become trapped somewhere in your house and to suffer the gradual madness that comes from having your house invaded be endless generations of strangers is completely ridiculous.

Life is a continuous biological cycle. All biological organisms sequester nutrients so they may function. They too become the nutrients for other organisms. Being at the top of the food chain doesn't give us the right to deny the rest of nature the nutrients we possessed in life but no longer need in death.

Sealing our corpses away in boxes and concrete tombs adorned with everlasting monoliths, is denying the soil badly needed nutrients for the rest of nature, and denying the living freedom from distraction by sorrowful reminders.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Belief versus Faith

The phrase “non-believer” is derogatory

The definitions of the word "belief" on more than one online dictionary include “Mental reliance on or acceptance of a particular concept, which is arrived at by weighing external evidence, facts, and personal observation and experience."

For a while I was feeling a stigma attaching to the word "belief." So many posts on other boards are mingling the word "belief" with the word "faith" which is "Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing." [ http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com ]

Therefore, "belief” in reference to religion is an inappropriate use of the word.

To call someone a non-believer is to claim that they are mentally at a level of development equivalent to an infant who does not search for hidden objects [ http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Applied_History_of_Psychology/Cognitive_Development ]

The word “belief” in reference to anything intangible is inappropriate

Technically, belief occurs at around eight months old, and is the capacity to search for hidden objects because, you saw it there, so you must believe it is there. You walk out of your kitchen, and you can hold the belief that the refrigerator or oven will be there when you return moments later.

The word “belief” can therefore only apply to everything that qualifies within the definition as prescribed in legally accepted dictionaries.

One cannot hold a belief about anything that was never proven to exist, therefore the word “belief” can never be used in the context of any religion because it is completely grounded in the rules of the scientific process.

Faith means to trust even the unsubstantiated opinion.
Faith is defined as “Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.” [ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/faith ]

Faith is primarily a communicative expression of loyalty in the process of affinity-seeking and affiliation behaviors. If it serves a purpose beyond that, I would like to know about it.

Using the word "belief" in the definition of the word "faith" is in error.