I emerge from another self-imposed public exile with a mind overburdened with the daily privation of intellectual discourse. Every day I read another piece of excrescence from Dinesh D’Souza, or a local opinion column about the collectivism, communism, or statism of non-belief, about how atheism is teaming up with Islam, threatening our kids, or destroying society; everyday I force myself, for some unknown mental sadistic reason, to scroll through another contentious and jejune dictum on the greatness of superstition and mental obedience. I came home last night to another piece of D’Souza’s agitprop, and that shit-eating grin of his, and I lost it emotionally. The unending stream of garbage spouting the same refuted points is exhausting. I don’t have the time or the energy to single handily combat all of it. Most of the time I pass the articles over to AANR, sometimes I feel better commenting myself, but of late it just seems to be gaining momentum. One-liner punditry, worthless, and devoid of any real substance, spewed over and over; I marvel at my passionate contemporaries’ ability to brush off most of it as merely the death throes of a wasting and dying religion.

Let them have their precious beliefs one might say; and I hear you. My issue is not the lay-believer, the weekly participant, or even the piously devout who twist their own revelations towards reason to fit into society. On the contrary, my problem lies with the twisting of reality to fit into the revelations! The revision of history, the systematic theology of apologetics and Christian defense of Theonomy, and the current political Theocratic Dominionism prevailing through our culture and politics.

The abuses of the clergy and their megalithic churches is undeniable. It is a matter of principle and reason, and chiefly a matter of philosophical understanding.

The modern day atheist is the intellectual descendant of Enlightenment monism. This is not a theory, this is fact. It was with even greater courage and greatness that any true non-believers existed prior to 1859, to mollify the mental disposition towards authoritative natural conscience would have required profound intelligence, prevalent in men like Spinoza and Hume.

Today it is easier to obtain the truth, requiring nothing more than selective readings of great minds. I always ask that in the spirit of discourse one reads and understands the best the opposition has to offer, as to realize that their best is wholly insufficient. Scientists do balk at the “atheism” of evolutionary science, but evolution is the final brick in the philosophical destruction of revealed religions. Today it appears as if every major politician and leader must pander to the believers in our time in a way that is more barbaric than the early founding of our country. The deism of Jefferson, Paine, Franklin, Allen, Washington, Madison, and Adams was contrary to every utterance of the modern churches. Rights are endowed by the Creator, or Nature’s God, but the the rule of the people is by the people, not a god, and certainly not the god of the revealed religions! A single quote, completely in context, can sum the entire disdain for some of the most important Founding Fathers, if there still remains any uncertainty about the subject. In context, imagine Hillary Clinton, John McCain, or Barack Obama saying any of the phrases, and having a chance to remain in Presidential contention. Christianity has changed little since this time period, but it has gained tremendous power, against all expressive attempts to prevent a Theocracy. Imagine, as I have, the response Washington gave to Hancock about chaplains being assigned to the military; “Among many other weighty objections to the Measure, it has been suggested, that it has a tendency to introduce religious disputes into the Army, which above all things should be avoided, and in many instances would compel men to a mode of Worship which they do not profess.” He would not get away this today!

John Adams:
“Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?”

Thomas Jefferson:
“The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.”

James Madison:
“The difficulty of reconciling the Xn [Christian] mind to the absence of a religious tuition from a University established by law and at the common expense, is probably less with us than with you. The settled opinion here is that religion is essentially distinct from Civil Govt. and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurous to both; that there are causes in the human breast, which insure the perpetuity of religion without the aid of law; that rival sects, with equal rights, exercise mutual censorships in favor of good morals; that if new sects arise with absurd opinions or overheated imaginations, the proper remedies lie in time, forbearance and example; that a legal establishment of religion without a toleration could not be thought of, and without a toleration, is no security for public quiet & harmony, but rather a source itself of discord & animosity; and finally that these opinions are support by experience, which has shewn that every relaxation of the alliance between Law & religion, from the partial example of Holland, to its consummation in Pennsylvania Delaware NJ, &c, has been found as safe in practice as it is sound in theory. Prior to the Revolution, the Episcopal Church was established by law in this State. On the Declaration of independence it was left with all other sects, to a self-support. And no doubt exists that there is much more of religion among us now than there ever was before the change; and particularly in the Sect which enjoyed the legal patronage. This proves rather more than, that the law is not necessary to the support of religion.”

Benjamin Franklin:
“…Some books against Deism fell into my hands….It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quote to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations, in short, I soon became a thorough Deist.”

Thomas Paine:
“The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion.”

Ethan Allen:
“Denominated a Deist, the reality of which I have never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian.”

—In this, I share only the philosophical belief that the enemy is not the religious, and that other atheists and agnostics ought to take the word Freethinker instead. “Revealed” religion is the enemy of reason, that which accepts revelation as in any way a reliable source of knowledge and information about the world. All religions that profess revelation as this source, are the enemies of reason, and contrary to the Freethinker, contrary to the Founders of this country.

In the current mire of the political process every piece and scrap of the ineffectual concept of “what matters” is tossed into the media mediums like a metaphysical Safari Supper, latching on to the already American Idol and Reality TV burdened minds of the superficial proletariat; the dying essence of our country hanging on the whim of the rusting metal hinges formally known as bipartisanship. The average citizen is devoid the requisite “informed citizenry” clause of the defining document of our Republic, and as an inevitable response we are left with conflicting and opposing ideologies vying for the scraps of a large ignorant horde of people whose collective power is the abiding spirit of mob rule. To this, there is no answer. So much complexity on something that should exist in harmony. A revisionist history of this country is nearly complete, and the corruption of the concept of Natural Rights is quickly becoming the final fiat that will sink the ship, and anchor her to a stifling regression from which she may never return. A rotting hegemony, wrung dry of any reason, fast centrifuging towards the extremes, the country’s blood is being separated and we are but a few elections from thralldom.

I am a man lacking in tempered responses to dire situations. I also lack knowledge of how to weave a basket underwater. Very few things come to the point of mortification than that of the destruction of higher education. The place most responsible for protecting this country from radical extremism is first to fall victim to it. I ask this, if a degree in Coaching is a Mickey Mouse degree, what do we have left to call a degree from Liberty University?

There needs to be a new term. There are hundreds of unrecognized accreditation mills in this country, and they are in return giving “accreditation” to joke schools with the approbation of the Bush Administration and Congress, as if it were the job of the Federal Government to decide what should be accepted in Academia. This is beyond madness, beyond transcending insanity, and beyond putrescence. This is ass.

This does not just pertain to organizations like the American Accrediting Association of Theological Institutions, American Association of Bible Colleges, and the World Online Education Accrediting Commission, all battling in a tight race for most absurd and ridiculous organizations on the planet, no no no, this also includes Department of Education toilet bowl floaters. The golden turds of worthless creditors. This includes the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and The Association for Biblical Higher Education.

This country continues to revere ignorance. If a University in its mission statement excludes, as a badge of honor, basic science principles, why on Earth do we honor anything produced by that school, students included? These Universities do not believe in academic freedom. They do not believe in a battlefield for social and cultural ideas. They believe in one way of life only, and that this way ought to be honored to the highest degree in a system that was meant to reward higher education standards.

How long before we have completely revised science and history? With the combination of Frank Luntz-like punditry and degree-mill universities, why do people even ask why this country is getting dumber?

This is your list of the top ten things literally destroying this country:

1. Science education is confused with philosophy. Philosophy no longer rejects false logic and claims. Teaching that a “theory” is just a conjecture, a bit of possible explanation that has no backing, that Global Warming and Evolution is debatable.
2. Home-schooling. One person or group of a very specific one-minded world view can better teach a person over hundreds of teachers with varying degrees and expertise.
3. Fox News, in order to combat perceived liberal bias, has created an actual bias divide between once honorable media outlets. Tabloid news as legitimate. Highly biased conservative spin. The Banner. O’Reilly. Hannity.
4. Federalist controlled judicial system. They have fought to get power in the courts, and they have. Congratulations America, you are no longer free.
5. Push polling, loaded questions, loaded spam, loaded hoax emails.
6. Liberals not voting and “liberal”, the belief in limited government and maximized social freedom, as a bad word.
7. Talk radio monopoly. Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity, unlettered and uninformed loud-mouths with nothing to add to the debate except one-liners on perceived ideologies that don’t promote a fascist state.
8. The revision of history, including false quote mining and poor sourcing. Examples include the belief that this was a Christian Nation and was founded as such…
9. Out of control powerful executive branch. Powerful corporatism, free market allowance of pure monopolies, lobbyist and fear politics to manufacture votes. War powers, and the breach of the separation of church and state.
10. Last, but most important, the inexcusably uninformed citizenry and social conservatism.

NPR had a fascinating discussion this morning about the apparent increase in religious fervor around the world. Alan Wolfe with the center for Religion and Public Life at Boston College on the show made the case that the idea that religion was increasing is false. In fact, the world is becoming far more secular, which is not only good for economic and social wealth, but also good for peace. Of course, America is an open sore of an exception. Increase of wealth usually means a decrease of religion, but in America the increasing religion is in extraordinarily divisive, although it is not a revival, it may be a sign of a real religious death.

It gets me thinking.

As America moves closer towards a fascist state, liberal democracy has been turned into almost a swear word. No longer is it important if prosperity exists as an opportunity for all, no longer does equality of opportunity matter, no longer does civil rights and basic freedoms matter. Our country glorifies corporatism on the corporate owned venues of media and literature, (DaneAndrade.com is owned solely by me, Dane Andrade fyi) our country promotes strong militant nationalism and a national religion. It scoffs at violation of basic freedoms like privacy and freedom of association, one national language, one style of culture, and one desired ethnicity, and it wills a strong federal government. This is called, ironically, Conservatism.

Conservatism can’t be dying, but perhaps it is the cause of dying religion. Of course, by dying, I don’t actually mean that it is dwindling… rather, the highest producers, largest educated minority of this country, the most charitable and giving factions of this country are quickly turning away from dogma and the fetters of Christian hegemony.

There is a worrying trend however… Some have argued that where the open economy and free market exists, old world religion will also die.

This is where the flaw exists. Prosperity may kill religion, especially in the early stages., but the evolving religion will find a way to inject itself into free systems, like a tree killing vine. Here, the most prosperous country in existence, religion is killing us.

Prosperity Gospels.

The religious answer to the free market. The religious answer to growing secularism. Brand the faith under Joel Osteen and mega-church, and watch it flourish. Now, rampant monopolistic corporatism coupled with faith-guided politicians is destroying any residual essence of free market culture, ideas, and will ultimately cripple the economy.

What does Christianity offer Americans? Overpowering federal legislation that allows the government more power in the churches and the churches more power to enact powerful freedom destroying laws.

I’m done insulting benign faiths. My target remains forever, till the day I die, the fundamentalism of evangelical faiths in America and other countries. I have eternally sworn that it will be over my carcass that any words of the Bible are ever put into law in this country. As a member of Americans United I have found religious allies in this… people who understand that basic religious freedom starts with preservation of your own enemy’s faith.

America is the most powerful country in the world, and it is becoming a theocratic fascist state. This is undeniable. There is no compelling argument against it. Nothing. The only argument there is, by some, is that this is an acceptable path for this country.

I beg to differ.

I have graduated from school and inherited a world devoid of the promises of liberty and  the freedoms I read about in school. Instead of fighting for new freedoms, instead of marching down the streets as a new generation, new knowledge, better understanding, I find myself fighting unbelievable regression. Backwards. I can’t fight for new things, I have to fight for things that were once already decided. Things as simple of as the basic religious freedom of the citizenry. I did not inherit a free country. I walked into the scene as the destruction of law and the understanding of history were beginning. Instead of fighting for the rights of others, I have to fight for basic rights away from people who should know better… We have never regressed before… we have never gone backwards, towards darkness, like we are doing today.

This is an open cry to my ruling countrymen and women. You fucked things up for us. And you better believe we are pissed. Baby-boomer generation has royally ass-raped this country and my generation. Never before can I look back at a past generation and decide with such anger and bitterness, that they have failed their sons and daughters. This country is not safer. This country is not freer. This country is not more prosperous. What the fuck were you people doing this whole time? Worrying about what other people were doing in their bedrooms, worrying about fetuses, worrying about growing a massive military while stripping basic infrastructure growing programs to shreds, worrying about who was the sexiest actor in Hollywood, worrying about what people injected into their bodies… In the name of the things that offend you personally, you have crippled the people you meant to save. Damn you.

Everyone in my generation should be PISSED. These aging morons in Congress, on both sides, are living in age of personal self satisfying, while acting like they are giving anything back to us. An entire generation has raped for itself, leaving us with a dying planet, a dying ecosystem, a dying economy, and dying freedoms.

Their own system of self-preservation is also going to fail under them… What happened to the desire to leave this world a better place for your children? Overweight, television watching, moron voting, failures.

We don’t owe you anything. What have you given us? An opportunity to succeed? An opportunity to create? Massive national debt, limited freedoms, never-ending wars, terrorism, dogmatic religious fervor… Those are wonderful things. Thank you.

This doesn’t include them all. There are many people in my life, including my parents, who are superb exceptions. But they are outnumbered by the Fox News watching zombie horde.

You are even voting against us… as if you know better at this point. Why is my generation so against yours? Why are we voting so differently? Greedy bastards.

We are voting this time. Maybe I’m a cynic. It just seems like we’ve been lied to…

All I can say, I promise you my generation will be voting this year… and you will be seeing a change.

As an epsilon of the “We”, noted as the first word of the preamble of the Constitution of the United States, my opinion on certain matters is relatively worthless. You should be aware that this of course has no bearing on my desire to spread my opinion, which I deem mildly superior to most. Undoubtedly, this will leave some to declare a nimiety of arrogance, for which I have no real rebuttal, save my disclaimer that I am always willing to change my mind when confronted with arguments coupled in deep intuition, operating within abstraction of concepts logically constructed. You can find me most often clashing with the shrinking “…pool of well-informed, clear-thinking Americans…” as the ever orotund Bill O’Reilly calls them, the clear contrast to academic professionals, scientists, writers, journalists, teachers, and the leaders in arts and entertainment. Indeed.

In the early dystopian literature of post 1905 we were introduced to the idea of totalitarian states, from Yevgeny Zamyain’s novel We (coincidental relation to the previous pronoun), Animal Farm , Brave New World, and Nineteen Eighty-Four, to Ayn Rand’s Anthem, and Vonnegut’s first novel Player Piano. In these novels the idea of socialism is brought to bear on the consequences of lost individualism. The industrial statehoods that rule the lives of people reflect the conformity, unity, and stability wrought from the stagnation of rational men and women. The endless message of devaluation, of depravity undefined, a common enemy built from the masses, and collective fears forged by the power of mass media, control better than any removed power or government ever could hope to dream. When the message is imposed, by mental coercion, and the threat of physical coercion, it is as uncontrollable as the fires of a tire yard. The message hides itself among the detritus of cleverly forged words and meanings. Associations are abstractions, and concepts are abused. Like liberalism turned suddenly, in the span of twenty years to an evil word, and conservatism, the concept of conservation and preservation of values, suddenly means the power to repel change, and stagnate progress, so has liberty, the most important word ever created by humanity, fallen to destruction of imposed definitions and meaning. Liberty is the “freedom” to obey. Liberty is the signing of your life over to someone or something else. Liberty is obeying the marching orders of dead men and dead concepts, defined and instructed by living “medians” as links between the two. The words that are missing from the intent are shockingly apparent, like exposed women in a sea of soldiers. We, the “links” are the only ones who understand the “real” meaning of the Constitution. We, the self-defined “leaders” are the only ones who understand and speak the “real” meaning of God’s word. Absolute ideals forged in stone, translated by fools, packaged to idiots.

And on target, Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee delivers a sermon of servitude:

“When you give yourself to Christ, some relationships have to go,” he said. “It’s no longer your life; you’ve signed it over.”

Likening service to God to service in the military, Huckabee said “there is suffering in the conditioning for battle” and “you obey the orders.”

I’ll simply and unequivocally not stand for it. I’ll not be told what my life means to me, or what I will do with it. This is beyond my restive spirit, beyond my own frustration at the forces of irrational thought. This is a man who understands the closing gaps, and means to choke the last vestals of sanity from our once proud Republic. This isn’t just a call for a theocracy, a tyranny, a totalitarian statehood. It is the call, as it has always been, for the end of dissent and free-thought. The values of the our society are seeped in the essence of true liberty, of free-thought, of true freedom, and the very real thirst for knowledge and desires and passions of the minds of men. Beware always the disclaimer on liberty, the prepositions. Men and women who desire such freedom from tyranny will inevitably rebel against any definition of freedom that contains the words “always”, “must”, “for”, “from” and “through”.

Freedom is you. It is YOUR ability to establish YOUR values, with the respect and acceptance of OTHER’S values.

If we cannot define freedom, we must recognize what it is not:

Freedom must not include _______
Freedom is only from _______
Freedom is always ________
Freedom is for _______
Freedom is only _______

And you will hear it spoken, as a finality, and the stamp of your slavery, and your servitude in one way:

Freedom is only through_____ always for _____ and only from ______.

Your life truly is yours. You are autonomous, and you are the only master of your own person. Stand against the people who tell you otherwise. Stand against them or lose your only chance for freedom, the one freedom that hasn’t been taken from you… the freedom to fight for liberty’s very meaning.

“Nothing is more difficult and nothing requires more character than to find oneself in open opposition to one’s time (and those one loves) and to say loudly: NO!” -Kurt Tucholsky

Nothing extracts from me greater inner turmoil and frustration than the Christian self-aggrandized claim that their source of morality is the greatest in the world. The bogus axiom is a sort of mantra of the Christian orthodoxy, so much so, that it rears it’s ugly face during every major election. Our favorite Joseph Smith worshiping candidate even added his two cents when questioned by Tim Russert on Meet The Press:

MR. RUSSERT: But when you say freedom requires religion, can you be a moral person and be an atheist?

GOV. ROMNEY: Oh, oh, of course. Oh, of course.

MR. RUSSERT: And participate in freedom?

GOV. ROMNEY: Oh, of course. Yes, this…

MR. RUSSERT: So freedom doesn’t require religion?

GOV. ROMNEY: Well, this–the, the context was talking about the, the founding of the nation and the, the sense in this case of John Adams describing the fact that our constitutional form of government and this American experiment required morality, which in turn required religion. And, and yet, of course, on an individual basis, you have many individuals of great morality and–that, that don’t have any particular faith.

How touching. I’m about as moved by Romney’s sincere tone as a dying country dog on a front porch. I know I’ve touched on the issue many times, but I can’t emphasize it enough; the general assumption, in all forms of media, that somehow, and someway, morality comes from a religion, is, absurdly offensive. I’ve seen debates, much like the one’s Dinesh D’Souza contributes, in which the particular non-believer on the other side seemingly gives a pass to the egregious falsity. I am not unlearned when it comes to the bible, and I am well aware how life lessons and morality can be deprived from the book.

The religious go from declaration of rights from the holy book, to denouncement of rights with the book, and continue to take credit for the morality of this generation, while ignoring the morality of previous generations. If a morality can be deprived with considerable effort from such an ancient text, this same effort should not be exhausted in the effort to exonerate themselves from the evils of their own history.

Morality is an accepted code of conduct. This is not a statement of “merely” but rather an authoritative pronouncement of certainty. One cannot paint a proper picture of the entire origins of the current Moral Zeitgeist, but one can identify the occasional leaps in understanding. Often, these turns come at the cost of human life and dignity, like the 1940’s Holocaust. Our general ability as a society to accept certain behaviors is sharpening the focus constantly away from transient barbarism to ever increasing levels of social ratiocination, humanity marches towards a generally better “accepted code of conduct”.

Christianity deserves credit for the commercialization of the most modern forms of morality. The ability to stamp ownership on the progress of human behavior is unique to the great Monotheism. Where every moral and bit of wisdom could claim origins in some other combined effort of social groups, it is with Christianity that the first real arrogant claims of moral development present themselves. The only thing worthy of this title is in fact, progress. Instead, society is told that the bible contains all the real world morality society needs. I disagree.

The New Testament is a decaying pasture of morality. Even when raked, sowed, and fertilized, often it’s with the carcasses of it’s own making, there is little, if any, practical standard of behavior to gain from it. If at anytime in humanity’s history the doctrine of Justice, Mercy, and Love were at the forefront of Christian past, I am willing to publicize my oversight. I believe that first and foremost principles in the early Christian and modern Christian religion is the doctrine of faith. Faith that God was a man, and a man was a god. Faith that man is born tainted, and must atone for this crime of being born by choosing to believe that this taint, this evil was cleansed by a man, 2,000 years prior. It is this faith that guided the marching armies of believers so many times throughout our history. It is through lack of faith that so many were put to death by so many who announced themselves of the most faithful. The doctrine of belief without reason first, is the doctrine that claims moral superiority over other creeds.

When faith is obtained, enter the doctrine of Jesus sayeths. It is not enough that the man spoke first and foremost to love, which, I am ever convinced, that if the man existed, he was a morally superior, vastly progressive liberal, to which I cannot take this from the author of these teachings. These teachings failed when the first Christian put to death a non-believer. These teachings continue to fail everyday, whenever someone goes out of there way to make another person’s life more uncomfortable, more stringent, more adverse, more dire. These teachings fail the second those feelings of hate emerge when a Christian reads that others don’t agree with them. It is the greed and desire for immortality that pushes the Christians, and it is the doctrine of faith that cements it. It is with this version of morality that continues today. Whoever can speak loudest what they think should be derived from the texts, is the leader. We are superior in morality because we say so, and the morality we speak of, is right here, when I apply this particular utterance to everyday life. The commercialization of this sort of morality takes on this form. Nowhere does the bible forbid abortion, or slavery, or torture, but everywhere the Christians march with tape on their mouths in defense of woman’s reproductive slavery, comparable, but philosophically no different than the coercive enslavement and ownership of other peoples.

But I am not done, because it is with Christianity as well, that the most unimaginable and unmistakable evil is forged. If we are to give credit to Christianity for Western Morality, than we most give it credit for the most disturbing and unequal evil ever conceived by man. The doctrine of hell. Nowhere is there more evil buried, than in the concept of eternal torment. An everlasting pain. Everlasting fire. Everlasting torture. This concept, this unthinkable and mind-numbing revelation, is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament, and not within the understanding of the New Testament. The same effort that could be applied to remove the simple and dreamlike sequences of imagery of a hell, are instead implied to demonstrate the prowess of the text to explain the good behaviors of society.
They are to blame for the good, yet, allowed exemption from the evil?

Finally, ask yourself this. If the same effort to deprive morality from the New Testament, the non-literal, metaphoric understandings of Jesus, were equally employed in the understanding of the punishments described in the odd, and obviously metaphorical rantings of Revelations, would Hell be a distinguishable concept at all? And, given that this is an obvious answer, why then, even promote it?

It is my opinion that it is a stretch to claim that morality is sourced with Christianity, but it is not a stretch to see how the modern concepts of Hell are used to lure and keep people believing in the original commercialization on the religion.
Ask yourself, why, as a body and extension of society, has Christianity not rejected the doctrine of hell?

The answer is because it has no real monopoly on morality. It is in fact, a source of regression and decay. The anti-love. A reasonable and loving and just person rejects the concept of hell out of common sense. Yet, people still preach about it and attempt to scare others with the inconceivable evil, and at the same time, exonerate themselves from it’s fabrication and endless promotion. The most hateful and virulent forms of behavior done in modern times, are people who believe in a heaven and hell; themselves always the recipient of the eternal paradise.

I have raised money for Ron Paul, I have recruited people to the campaign, I have defended his positions, and I have stood out in the cold to help get signatures. I have also contributed over 300 posts to the Ron Paul Forums, and was considered a Senior Member.

After posting recently four major concerns about atheists and Ron Paul’s policies, the thread was effectively deleted. Upon pointing out that I did not violate any of the forum rules by criticizing his stances, (concerning abortion, separation of church state, racism, education, and his views on evolution and science)the new thread was also deleted, and I was banned permanently from the forums.

This is what a campaign begins to look like. The Ron Paul supporters can congratulate themselves, they are mainstream, and they are acting like it. I have no real equivalent explanation to the behavior. This is a campaign that swears on the Constitution and our freedoms, a quasi libertarian movement that attempts to be above everyone else, especially in regards to our first freedoms.

What can I say about this? This is representative of the campaign and the movement. I have received personal return mail on the positions of every candidate or campaign except Ron Paul. One can only assume that he is offended by my non-belief, which means he will be offended by your non-belief. The grassroots campaign has become a cult whose rabid fans continue to expouse freedom as a qualifier of their authority under the guise of Christian Dominionism oozing with distant echoes of white supremacy. The real libertarians have been ejected from the role they started in the grassroots effort. In its place, this, an odd collection of pseudo-intellectual self-appointed arbiters, who believe in some sort of political panacea who, armed with single sentence cliches, run to the defense of Ron Paul’s policies despite the goatse like holes that have gone unfilled.

Am I bitter? Maybe. I don’t exonerate myself from a part in any of this… It was not like I was a troll or an obnoxious presence. I have merely been a presence of dissent that was deemed dangerous enough to the campaign to delete and ban permanently, without even a defined reason.

I believe in freedoms. There isn’t a freedom that someone could convince me to with enough reason and rationale.

What is this? This is what it has become? Suppressing a dissenting opinion? For what end? What reason, other than the fear that what I have to say may in fact reach a few people?

In no way do I intend to imply that I lost support for Ron Paul because of this event. I apologize for that misconception. My opinion changed because of issues I have yet to discuss. I would like to point out this post was more about the hypocrisy of being banned from a Ron Paul Forum in light of the claim of supporters to adhere to the principles of freedom. Many Ron Paul supporters have also attacked other forums for deleting threads about Ron Paul.

1. I did not endorse another candidate.
2. I did not break any of the forum rules.
3. I brought up a long list of issues and concerns in my consideration for Ron Paul as a candidate.
4.  Thread was deleted
5. Bringing up the deletion got my account banned.

Savvy?

Discussion on Facebook.

Remember when a Ron Paul Thread was deleted by Sean Hannity Forums?

Would you consider an equal lawsuit for MIDDLE SCHOOLERS who had to endure “A Letter From Hell.“?

Well, a teacher showed her class. Welcome to the culture war my friends.

(The video is pure evil. Don’t watch it unless you enjoy twisted sick shit.)

“Religion! but for thee, prolific fiend,
Who peoplest earth with demons, hell with men,
And heaven with slaves!”

If I were to assume the tactics of my theist peers, who oft clarify arguments in the nature of emotional appeals, I would declare, like Shelley, that “it is among men of genius and science that atheism alone is found.” Any relatively objective definition of genius will reflect this as truth. It is also among atheists that we find the most tolerant and less likely to abuse the indefatigably dim-witted. This isn’t an observation born of questionable experience, this is measurable fact. I once offered an essay declaring that the very definition of genius should entail a skeptical examination of origins and divinity, to which, the Christian hypothesis ought fail magnanimously. Perhaps this is going too far, and therefore reserve my right to extend an open invitation to be refuted soundly on this point.

Declarations of the intellectual bankruptcy of atheism, itself a pillaged phrase of freethought’s past,  are rampant. Let us look at a selection from a randomly chosen article from my news feed today.

From Here,

“Whether atheists believe it or not they are a “religion.” You have to have a lot of faith to believe there is no God. I have a hard time figuring out why, if they don’t believe there is a God, are they so obsessed with Him? When I don’t believe something I just drop it and go on with my life. I would assume they may fear there really is a God. I ask them why take that chance? that when you die you will meet your Creator and He will have to condemn you to an eternal hell. What do you think your children would say to you once you are all condemned. A simple act of admitting you are a sinner and can’t make it to heaven on your own. Second, believing Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day and lastly calling on Jesus to come into your heart and take over your life. Such a simple act and many people besides atheists refuse to do this.

I will not force my beliefs on anyone. I just ask that you think it over and ask yourself, “Do I really want to take a chance if there is eternal life.” If you choose Jesus Christ I can guarantee you according to His word that there will be great things in the next life for those who trust in Christ.”

I can’t make this stuff up. So absurd is the content of these “news” reports, that many atheists, myself included, don’t even bother to respond. There is a reason we reject certain arguments in passing. We have exhausted Pascal’s Wager, “faith to believe there is no god”, and “Atheism is a religion” to pointless ends. These arguments are just outright rejected and ignored by all but the most fledgling freethinkers among us (and I am eternally thankful for their dedication). I have to point this out. We don’t even acknowledge this trash, yet it is common still. This line of thinking is not just common, it is expanding. Granted, this man, Tom Kubera of Dunkirk, wouldn’t survive four seconds in a general conversation with myself or any of battle forged members of the Secular Student Alliance, Rational Response Squad, and AANR.

I believe that theist leaders don’t believe what they are saying. They can’t be… Yes, this is a form of argument from incredulity, but I simply can’t believe that intelligent theists, for which there are some, believe that using these arguments is even valid anymore. Rationally think about this… it really seems to be a true tactic to keep simple people in check. Declaring that evolution is evil, atheists are immoral or even devils, Hitler was an atheist, or that atheism requires faith, is just ignorant. Yet it is used, because it works. Atheists don’t tend to go straight for the simple arguments, the cultural verbal jingles and tired absurdities, we just answer.

Let’s face it. I once opined that reality is critical of religion. It is. Reality is also that rational, moral, intelligent and good people comprise the ranks of the atheists. Nothing should be more troubling that the statistics that atheists perform better on IQ tests, in schools, in relationships, stay out of prison, and make up some of the most abundant contributors to society overall, despite disparately minimal population numbers.

This seems to fly over the head of our dear friend Tom Kubera of Dunkirk. So, I’ll take some time out of my day, again, and go back to my roots. I’ll answer him.

“You have to have a lot of faith to believe there is no God.”
No Tom. Faith is trust or belief without reason. If you said that, because of your very devout belief that you are correct, that your god is the only god, that I, as a sovereign individual, must have “a lot of” trust without reason that you are correct, I would merely point out the number of people who followed that path before you. We call them cultists. Don’t assume that because you happen to have a verbal string of nonsense to invoke comparisons to other people who share your faith, that you even believe the same things. Taken apart, you are all cultists of the same mold. Each with a different interpretation, each with a different revelation, and some, who outright claim to converse with their fantastical deity. This argument is negating the fact that I even allowed you to get away with throwing a capitalized “God” out there as if I should know what you are talking about… I don’t actually. I mean it. I don’t know what you mean by “God”. Are you talking about Jesus? Are you talking about Jesus’ Father? Are they the same thing? Are you talking about the holy spirit? Yahweh? Elohim? Or am I going too far by invoking the American versions.. are you actually Muslim? Are you talking about Allah?  If not,  why not? Your god, no doubt, is not unique. I’m sure someone believes in the same version, with minor differences…  And I’m sure a collective band of you folks could come together, and come up with a religion. See, Tom, we are pretty simply people, we atheists. We don’t believe any of it. You must seem like you are making sense to yourself, all this talk about heaven and hell, and your great capitalized “God”. I honestly don’t. Sure, I understand from an American cultural perspective, I was raised Catholic, converted to Protestant, I think I know what you think you are talking about, but I’m not sure. I’d like to hear some of your theories. You seem passionate enough. We can start with a simple one, like, where is Hell located? Or my favorite, what if I don’t want to be immortal?

Do you want a simple answer Tom? No, I don’t have faith of any kind.

I am dependent “on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses” or rationally and reasonably sound proof.  Can you provide these things to me?

Our position is simple. We don’t have faith that there is a god.

Freedom is Religion, says Mitt Romney.

Religion has been the source of the greatest tyranny, and the servitude of men to a celestial super-spirit is representative of all forms of oppression towards man. If one person believes this, and I volunteer myself as this one person, have we now defined liberty thus; Freedom is Tyranny.

My rights come from the common law, the conceptual realization of natural laws. Not from a god, and most certainly not a representative of a Christian sub-cult who decries that faith is requirement for office.

I cannot stand for it, and as the formation of new concepts of freedom are made, the law makers chip away from the inside to promote it… No human, no citizen of a free country should stand back idly while these events unfold. All women and men of reason should respond in full to these efforts.

“For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it.”-Ayn Rand

Tyranny approaches. It does not slip in under the cover of darkness, but under the guise of invisible sanctity; promises of everlasting gifts, protection from the unseen; it glistens with a freshly signed paper and the blundering mass of ignorance. Demand the freedoms you can see, the freedoms you can taste, the freedoms you can live in now… do not sacrifice this life because you are so certain of the next.

The salad days of the bloated clusterfuck to the Whitehouse are all but over and the corporate Special Olympics is replaced now by the grandstanding political version of the WWF, where the blood and passionate diatribes serve as a surprise reminder that we are actually suppose to believe the verbal brutality has any veracity.

The mass media has chosen an interesting collection of second rate public officials. Interestingly enough, half of them don’t even believe in public service, effectively declaring that they deserve to be elected on the merits of their own unworthiness to serve the public. This very fascinating fact could only be compared to an all too early appeal to a violation of Godwin’s Law, for which I will take no part.

Instead, let’s take a book out of fine nude art and focus on the flaccid penis of a campaign by Ron Paul. To be fair, there is a deep resonating appeal of the ideals written and spoken by Ron Paul for me. I could read his thoughts and consider myself sold on someone who exemplified magnanimously the ideals of a freedom-loving libertarian. I even introduced Ron Paul to many others, with surprising results. I never stopped searching and learning about Dr. Paul. I learned that despite the fact that 90% of Ob/Gyns support a woman’s right to make decisions on her body, even if it meant the termination of the unborn, Ron Paul does not. I forgave him that, believing that most states wouldn’t be that stupid to make a law against it. I forgave Ron Paul for his cringe worthy belief that this country is a Christian Nation, despite the fact that his heroes, Ayn Rand and Thomas Jefferson were openly mocking of his faith. Believe me, this was really difficult for me. I forgave Ron Paul for ignoring seven handwritten letters asking him to clarify for me his stance on the separation of church and state and his desire to “restore” the first amendment to it’s intended purpose. I had always thought that the 200 years of historical affirmation of the establishment clause and religious freedom clause were sound, but Paul believes that prayer should be “brought back” into schools. Since prayer is already allowed, one must believe he means that he would support teacher led prayer, and the state’s right to enforce such a measure on it’s school districts. Some would argue that he wants to eliminate federal control of education, which is honorable, except that in his actions again, he has proposed big government amendments that would allow the current state run education system to violate the establishment clause. Of course, it wouldn’t be violating it if he personally changed it with an amendment, which was the desire, and ultimately the problem. I forgave him that. I really did. There are much bigger problems in America. The war, the economy. Which is why I defended Ron Paul to the best of my ability, and challenged his grassroot supporters in their fledgling embrace of the ideals of liberty. Ron Paul certainly seemed to understand it…

Which brings me back to his campaign. If Ron Paul believes most of what he spews, he would use embarrassing association with the Republican Party as a platform to launch a candidacy for President under another party or run as an independent. I have heard the many defenders of the position not to, and they simply don’t jive. If Ron Paul believes as strongly as he does about civil liberties, about non-intervention, about state’s rights, he will forgo the clusterfuck that is partisan politics and run a nasty grassroots campaign for President right now. His supporters are passionate, he has drawn from all walks of life in American people and he has brought together people of such wildly opposing viewpoints that one must stand back and observe in awe at what the system is suppose to look like…

Money is pouring in. The campaign was so well tuned for efficiency and spendthrift tidiness that it doesn’t know what to do with the money. Ron Paul is left defending himself in debates instead of preaching his message. I have seen commercials for fucking Drunkin Duncan Hunter, and I have seen nothing from Ron Paul. This is the time to make the move. This is the time to pull and push for those big endorsements, to force yourself in defiance to the established way of doing things and demand a platform, demand time, and use the support of the people pushing you to BUY that time if you must.

The campaign has pissed me off. This isn’t the passion of someone who wishes to win. I honestly don’t know what Ron Paul wants anymore. He doesn’t want the Presidency. Who the fuck is advising him? This is setting up to be the biggest joke on the voting public I have ever read about… to build up the passion of freedom thirsty people, and then to stragglefuck around like a self-deluded muppet is inexcusable, especially while invoking the real meaning of liberty, drawing from the apathetic a sense of power, a rise of common sense, a desire for involvement. As the representative who caused this, you cannot just fade away like a popped zit. You cannot sit back with that righteous half-wit goofy smile and suggest that you are going to win the republican nomination. He can’t be that stupid.

Dr. Paul, you had sold me. Against the things I disagreed with you on, things that were important to me, I still defended you. I hate the Republican Party, it deserves to lose every election from here to Anchorage. I registered as a Republican so I could vote for you. I’ve given money to your campaign. I convinced myself that it was all for the better. I dealt with the hordes of insane followers. The religious fanatics, the homophobic ex-neocons, the heartless droves of ignorant in hopes that this was going to be different. That you would lead us to the promise land.

Instead, you are more impotent than Fred Thompson, and he isn’t even trying. Your campaign is a joke. In fact, your campaign right now is comprised totally of grassroot efforts and passionate youths building websites, forums, youtube videos on their own. Where is your passion? Where is half of the passion of your supporters? This is incomprehensible. I cannot believe what I am seeing.

This is your failure. Not your ideals. Not your stances. Most of your policies would actually keep your own stupidity in check. I can excuse all these things, and I can exclude blame from the people I know who pour their heart out for you. No, I am not one of them, but I don’t have to be… this isn’t the fault of your supporters. This is your fault. This is your passionless dance. This is your time, and unlike 1988, you have a fighting chance. This country is anti-war. This country is anti-government. This country is pro-freedom. Where the fuck are you Ron Paul?

I don’t care if the backwood morons of Texas have voted you in as a Republican . You are running as the President of the United States of America. Act like you can handle that, act like you have a pair of balls. Don’t turn your back on the people who are fighting for you, as an extension of themselves. Yes. These people are voting for you Ron Paul, they are voting for themselves, for their reasons. You are failing them. This money, and there will be more, I promise you, this money is for you to compete on the level of the media chosen. You are meant to compete with them. Forget the success of the movement and focus on how the movement started. Focus on what you stand for… WE THE PEOPLE.

Dr. Paul your campaign is joke. Fire people, now. Do something different. You paid the same amount of money to be included in that debate and you choked. I’m not going to give you grief for appealing to big names. Impress a few celebrities, do what you have to do, because your message transcends you, it goes beyond you, and it resonates with people who should care. You have to act like you give a fuck.
Damn you Ron Paul. Don’t do this to us. Don’t do this to your supporters. You say you are not going to run if you don’t get the nomination.

Well, guess what? You aren’t going to get the nomination. So you’re not running. Tell that to our face. Grow a fucking spine and tell us exactly why you are not acting like you’re running for President; because you know deep down, that you aren’t running.