I don't worship the devil of christian folklore, but in a way, I do beleive in something that could be called "satan". For centuries, the various churches have preached against following man's own sence of morality, their instincts, their "sinful nature". Everything that makes humans human is the adversary to the church. Humanity is Satan. Satan is lust, Satan is greed, Satan is wrath, pride, envy and sloth. Satan is disregarding the Law of Moses because it is passed "because I said so", but it is following the laws that have the consequences known. The bible teaches in the 19th verse of the 29th chapter of Deuteronomy that the god of the cross will make anyone who follows his own moral code suffer. Satan is independant thought. Thinking what God did not permit. Satan is hating your enemies and loving your father, your mother, your wife, your husband, your children, your brothers and sisters and yourself. And even then if your love is returned. Satan is loving those who treat you right instead of seeking a 1 way relationship wih gods. Satan is seeking truth instead of mindlessly accepting what is told. Satan is doubt when things don't add up. Satan is the adversary. The adversary of dogma, the adversary of ignorence, the adversary of slavery to imagined masters.
Hail Satan
Sunday, 29 November 2009
Saturday, 28 November 2009
Review: Silent Night, Deadly Night.
I was at the import DVD store in the centre of London and I noticed an oddity. Silent Night, Deadly Night. I once saw this movie on youtube because of the related "Garbage Day" meme from its sequel. What surprised me was the 18 mark wasn't a sticker like on the other imports so it was an R2. Surprising since this movie was banned during the Video Nasty craze of the 80s.
So why was this particular movie banned? Because it involves a killer in a Santa costume. Apparently this premise caused protests in America from parents because a childhood icon is apparently a slasher villain.
OK, lets get this film into perspective. The movie starts with a family with a young boy and a baby on their way to visit their grampa. Problem is the grampa is in a mental defunct state. When alone, the grampa warns the young boy Billy that Santa punishes kids who've been naughty even once a year. As if this wasn't enough to give the kid a negative image of St Nick, the kid's parents are brutally murdered by a robber in a Santa costume, Billy and his baby brother Ricky are then raised in a catholic orphanage where the Mother Superior is an uncaring disciplinarian. Eventually Billy grows up and is given a job in a toy store. Things go OK until the run up to Christmas. Billy is made to fill in for the store Santa. Now wearing the costume, with a combination of his childhood trauma and mother Superior's punish happy raising, Billy sets up into the night slaying all those in his path he believes are "naughty". He is eventually killed by the police before he can turn his wrath on the mother superior. However Billy's brother witnesses the event and also declares mother superior naughty.
Now I'm not excusing Billy's rampage, but you can definitely see where it came from. You can't help but sympathize with Billy. Has the kid been giving counciling instead of lashing, maybe he could have turned out ok. Credit to the filmmakers for touching on the taboo of christmas horror films. While steriotypically a time of happiness and such this movie has balls. For a couple of moments, I cheered Billy on as he kills his first victim, a rapest and hoped he would gain his revenge on the Mother Superior. the movie doesn't have a big budget, but it does a well enough job in telling its story. Those who are after something different this christmas or just a collector of films previously banned by the BBFC this one's worth looking into.
So why was this particular movie banned? Because it involves a killer in a Santa costume. Apparently this premise caused protests in America from parents because a childhood icon is apparently a slasher villain.
OK, lets get this film into perspective. The movie starts with a family with a young boy and a baby on their way to visit their grampa. Problem is the grampa is in a mental defunct state. When alone, the grampa warns the young boy Billy that Santa punishes kids who've been naughty even once a year. As if this wasn't enough to give the kid a negative image of St Nick, the kid's parents are brutally murdered by a robber in a Santa costume, Billy and his baby brother Ricky are then raised in a catholic orphanage where the Mother Superior is an uncaring disciplinarian. Eventually Billy grows up and is given a job in a toy store. Things go OK until the run up to Christmas. Billy is made to fill in for the store Santa. Now wearing the costume, with a combination of his childhood trauma and mother Superior's punish happy raising, Billy sets up into the night slaying all those in his path he believes are "naughty". He is eventually killed by the police before he can turn his wrath on the mother superior. However Billy's brother witnesses the event and also declares mother superior naughty.
Now I'm not excusing Billy's rampage, but you can definitely see where it came from. You can't help but sympathize with Billy. Has the kid been giving counciling instead of lashing, maybe he could have turned out ok. Credit to the filmmakers for touching on the taboo of christmas horror films. While steriotypically a time of happiness and such this movie has balls. For a couple of moments, I cheered Billy on as he kills his first victim, a rapest and hoped he would gain his revenge on the Mother Superior. the movie doesn't have a big budget, but it does a well enough job in telling its story. Those who are after something different this christmas or just a collector of films previously banned by the BBFC this one's worth looking into.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Propaganda Corner: Psychiatry: An Industry of Death
In this first installment of Propaganda Corner, I shall be looking at Psychiatry: An Industry of Death.
Background
Psychiatry: An Industry of Death (PAIoD) is a film supposedly exposing the dark history of the mental illness field. It is produced by an organisation known as the citizens Commision for Human Rights (CCHR). CCHR is a group founded by the religious organisation known as the Church of Scientology, founded by writer L Ron Hubbard. Hubbard wrote a book called "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health". A book with unfounded medical claims. It is said his anti psychiatry stance is due to the direct competition it has with his Dianetics. In the course of a year, Dianetics became reorganised into the religion now known as Scientology. The Church of Scientology either on its own or through CCHR maintains an anti-psychiatry stance since.
The movie it self
PAIoD Starts with news clippings about drug releases and rise of mental illness. Then it cuts to snippets of interviews with supposed victims of psychiatrists. After the title card we get a history of psychiatry as told by CCHR. Emphasis is on the treatments which are primitive and torturous. Making claims the field was nothing more than a scam to make money, much like Dianetics in my opinion. The movie makes use of a lot of dark stylised images and stock footage of suffering.
The next part teaches how psychiatrists believed man is a soulless animal ruled solely in instinct. So now they are showing psychiatrists training people like animals using repetitive techniques. (Though scientology's Training Routines could be comparable). Techniques include electric aversion therapy.
The third part. Eugenics. A so called psychiatric invention. Described as a "pseudo-science". Despite the fact eugenics has been practiced by farmers for centuries when breeding animals and crops. Emphasis is on the eugenics on humans. Now I see nothing wrong with breeding more desirable aspects, such as people being born without appendixes (they serve no purpose now but to kill when infected) but I do not believe in "undesirable" people. Psychiatrists are claimed to have been the force that motivated Hitler and the Nazis to perform the horrific event we know as the Holocaust. They claim Eugenics is the justification for racism, which is furthered in the next part.
Eugenics Racist? We start with the bold claim that racism is inseparable with psychiatry. Claims that psychiatry was solely against black people. That it is the cause of slavery (not religion it seems) They also claimed that psychiatry is responsible with Apartheid in South Africa and the rise of such groups as the Klu Klux Klan. This is because supposedly because black people are "genetically inferior"
The next part makes the claim psychiatry was used in communist Russia as a means of dealing with political descent. While this is likely, it is not grounds to condemn the whole field. Locking up dissidents claiming they were mentally defunct. We are treated to the stories of the survivors from the regime. The movie claims now that Psychiatry is still used in this manner to keep people in line using torture.
The next part of the movie makes the claim psychiatrists deliberately use brain damage as a treatment. Showing the rise of Electro Convulsive Therapy and lobotomies. Lobotomies are described as being performed using icepicks in the eyes, a method which Hubbard seemed particularly fond of describing in his books. It is also in this section that makes the claim no progress is made in studying psychiatry, simply old methods being revamped and reused. And they also claim psychiatrists specifically target women and the elderly.
The next section states that psychiatrists have discovered the profitable usefulness of pushing drugs onto people. The movie claims that drugs are pushed despite the side effects. That the side effects were kept quiet so they could continue to make money on the drugs. They also make the claim that the chemical imbalance theory is completely false. Made up specifically to sell drugs to patients.
The next section now claims psychiatrists use involuntary commitment to keep institutions full so they can continue to make money. The movie attempts to play on emotions showing stories of children being commited. Descriptions of inhuman restraining on those who objected. Claims also of abuse of patients within hospitals by staff.
Now we get to the ad hom section. Psychiatry is evil because certain doctors are rapists. Claiming they are deliberately fraudulent for the sake of making money. Targeting people with good insurance. That many are child molesters.
Again we are reminded that many diagnosis's are invented. Even the outright claim that there is no such thing as a mental disorder. That psychiatrists make them up as they go on. Supposedly, ADD and ADHD are myths. They also made an effort to show psychiatrists as inconsistent and that they cannot cure anyone. That they exist only for the drug companies.
The next section plays again on emotion by claiming children are the targets of psychiatry's money making machine, diagnosing and drugging kids using supposedly false illnesses as ADD or ADHD. They show footage of a doctor struggling to explain the symptoms ADHD. Even going as far as inserting a clock on screen to further discredit him. Again we get stories of kids on pills becoming zombie like, erratic and even homicidal. Even going as far as blaming psychiatry on Columbine.
Now we enter a conspiracy section, how Psychiatry is infiltrating every aspect of life. So get out you tin foil hat for this section. Here we see a plot for global domination. Every horrific event including 9/11 is said to have psychiatric influence. So it doesn't have anything to do with religious dogma drilled in from cradle to grave, it's mental doctors.
The final section, surprise sup rise shows there is someone out there opposing this evil industry. Here CCHR devotes to self promotion. Though they admit they were founded by the Church of Scientology, they act as though independent. Promoting their exhibit that shares the name of this movie. This section is simply there to try and give hope to those who are unaware this is the first step to cult recruitment.
Watching this movie, I am reminded of the long feud between religion and science. The rivalry of the creationism movement and the scientific theory of evolution. The religious side being particularly bitter. Claiming the rival is evil pure and simple. This film by CCHR and their masters in the Church of Scientology is no different. Here people are taught to fear the rival of Dianetics and Scientology. To remain on the so called Bridge to Total Freedom, despite Dianetics, which Scientology is built on, is as effective as the patent cures peddle by quacks not that long before. This movie uses a lot of horrific images to degrade psychiatry. It also plays on the emotions of the viewer, but when the viewer is aware of the films origins, and the agenda of the the groups behind it, like other propaganda pieces, it loses effectiveness. In short, people play on ignorance to gain power over them, the best weapon is to learn more, learn both sides and not lose sight of objectivity.
Background
Psychiatry: An Industry of Death (PAIoD) is a film supposedly exposing the dark history of the mental illness field. It is produced by an organisation known as the citizens Commision for Human Rights (CCHR). CCHR is a group founded by the religious organisation known as the Church of Scientology, founded by writer L Ron Hubbard. Hubbard wrote a book called "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health". A book with unfounded medical claims. It is said his anti psychiatry stance is due to the direct competition it has with his Dianetics. In the course of a year, Dianetics became reorganised into the religion now known as Scientology. The Church of Scientology either on its own or through CCHR maintains an anti-psychiatry stance since.
The movie it self
PAIoD Starts with news clippings about drug releases and rise of mental illness. Then it cuts to snippets of interviews with supposed victims of psychiatrists. After the title card we get a history of psychiatry as told by CCHR. Emphasis is on the treatments which are primitive and torturous. Making claims the field was nothing more than a scam to make money, much like Dianetics in my opinion. The movie makes use of a lot of dark stylised images and stock footage of suffering.
The next part teaches how psychiatrists believed man is a soulless animal ruled solely in instinct. So now they are showing psychiatrists training people like animals using repetitive techniques. (Though scientology's Training Routines could be comparable). Techniques include electric aversion therapy.
The third part. Eugenics. A so called psychiatric invention. Described as a "pseudo-science". Despite the fact eugenics has been practiced by farmers for centuries when breeding animals and crops. Emphasis is on the eugenics on humans. Now I see nothing wrong with breeding more desirable aspects, such as people being born without appendixes (they serve no purpose now but to kill when infected) but I do not believe in "undesirable" people. Psychiatrists are claimed to have been the force that motivated Hitler and the Nazis to perform the horrific event we know as the Holocaust. They claim Eugenics is the justification for racism, which is furthered in the next part.
Eugenics Racist? We start with the bold claim that racism is inseparable with psychiatry. Claims that psychiatry was solely against black people. That it is the cause of slavery (not religion it seems) They also claimed that psychiatry is responsible with Apartheid in South Africa and the rise of such groups as the Klu Klux Klan. This is because supposedly because black people are "genetically inferior"
The next part makes the claim psychiatry was used in communist Russia as a means of dealing with political descent. While this is likely, it is not grounds to condemn the whole field. Locking up dissidents claiming they were mentally defunct. We are treated to the stories of the survivors from the regime. The movie claims now that Psychiatry is still used in this manner to keep people in line using torture.
The next part of the movie makes the claim psychiatrists deliberately use brain damage as a treatment. Showing the rise of Electro Convulsive Therapy and lobotomies. Lobotomies are described as being performed using icepicks in the eyes, a method which Hubbard seemed particularly fond of describing in his books. It is also in this section that makes the claim no progress is made in studying psychiatry, simply old methods being revamped and reused. And they also claim psychiatrists specifically target women and the elderly.
The next section states that psychiatrists have discovered the profitable usefulness of pushing drugs onto people. The movie claims that drugs are pushed despite the side effects. That the side effects were kept quiet so they could continue to make money on the drugs. They also make the claim that the chemical imbalance theory is completely false. Made up specifically to sell drugs to patients.
The next section now claims psychiatrists use involuntary commitment to keep institutions full so they can continue to make money. The movie attempts to play on emotions showing stories of children being commited. Descriptions of inhuman restraining on those who objected. Claims also of abuse of patients within hospitals by staff.
Now we get to the ad hom section. Psychiatry is evil because certain doctors are rapists. Claiming they are deliberately fraudulent for the sake of making money. Targeting people with good insurance. That many are child molesters.
Again we are reminded that many diagnosis's are invented. Even the outright claim that there is no such thing as a mental disorder. That psychiatrists make them up as they go on. Supposedly, ADD and ADHD are myths. They also made an effort to show psychiatrists as inconsistent and that they cannot cure anyone. That they exist only for the drug companies.
The next section plays again on emotion by claiming children are the targets of psychiatry's money making machine, diagnosing and drugging kids using supposedly false illnesses as ADD or ADHD. They show footage of a doctor struggling to explain the symptoms ADHD. Even going as far as inserting a clock on screen to further discredit him. Again we get stories of kids on pills becoming zombie like, erratic and even homicidal. Even going as far as blaming psychiatry on Columbine.
Now we enter a conspiracy section, how Psychiatry is infiltrating every aspect of life. So get out you tin foil hat for this section. Here we see a plot for global domination. Every horrific event including 9/11 is said to have psychiatric influence. So it doesn't have anything to do with religious dogma drilled in from cradle to grave, it's mental doctors.
The final section, surprise sup rise shows there is someone out there opposing this evil industry. Here CCHR devotes to self promotion. Though they admit they were founded by the Church of Scientology, they act as though independent. Promoting their exhibit that shares the name of this movie. This section is simply there to try and give hope to those who are unaware this is the first step to cult recruitment.
Watching this movie, I am reminded of the long feud between religion and science. The rivalry of the creationism movement and the scientific theory of evolution. The religious side being particularly bitter. Claiming the rival is evil pure and simple. This film by CCHR and their masters in the Church of Scientology is no different. Here people are taught to fear the rival of Dianetics and Scientology. To remain on the so called Bridge to Total Freedom, despite Dianetics, which Scientology is built on, is as effective as the patent cures peddle by quacks not that long before. This movie uses a lot of horrific images to degrade psychiatry. It also plays on the emotions of the viewer, but when the viewer is aware of the films origins, and the agenda of the the groups behind it, like other propaganda pieces, it loses effectiveness. In short, people play on ignorance to gain power over them, the best weapon is to learn more, learn both sides and not lose sight of objectivity.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Metropolis, an old movie with some interesting themes.
I was at London one day and I finally found a copy of a silent movie tht was said to inspire various others in the future. Fritz Lang's Metropolis. A movie where a city is divided into 2 distinct classes. The movie is too long to sumerise as this was a version that treid to restore the full story as originally writen. Here we have the story of workers who operate and maintain the machines that keep the city going, and the thinkers who live and rule the city. There is also a love story between the Freder Fredersen, son of the man who effectly rules the city, Joh Frederson and a woman of the workers, Maria. It is also the hope of this couple that they could reconcile the differences between the classes for a better future for both. But in this mix, is a mad scientist, Rotwang who bore a grudge against Joh Fredersen as he feels Frederson stole his love who died giving birth to Freder. Initially he builds a robot with the intention of modeling it after the lost Hel, so he can still have his love and in a way have his revenge over Fredersen. Fredersen however still uses Rotwangs services, when he learns of the robot, he has Rotwang model it after Maria as she has influence over the workers. Rotwang initially is hesitant until he learns Fredersen's son is involved, so he decides to go with Fredersen's idea, hoping to get revenge in this new manner.
There is some interesting themes in this movie, the most obvious is class, the rich and the powerful, and the downtroden workers. Another theme is communication. Throughout the movie it is suggested that the Workers and the "thinkers" are unable to understand eact other, hence the need for Freder to act as a mediator between the two classes. One other theme is revenge. Rotwang is so motivated to get his own back on Fredersen that he loses a hand tryng to develop a robotic replica of the woman he beleives Fredersen stole. He soon reworks his revenge by modeling the robot after Fredersen's son's girlfriend knowing it could destroy them both.
Overall a good movie, while indeed dated now, it is still an amazing film and I encourage those to look up the recent version that tries to restore what it could.
There is some interesting themes in this movie, the most obvious is class, the rich and the powerful, and the downtroden workers. Another theme is communication. Throughout the movie it is suggested that the Workers and the "thinkers" are unable to understand eact other, hence the need for Freder to act as a mediator between the two classes. One other theme is revenge. Rotwang is so motivated to get his own back on Fredersen that he loses a hand tryng to develop a robotic replica of the woman he beleives Fredersen stole. He soon reworks his revenge by modeling the robot after Fredersen's son's girlfriend knowing it could destroy them both.
Overall a good movie, while indeed dated now, it is still an amazing film and I encourage those to look up the recent version that tries to restore what it could.
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Nothing to live for? Nothing to die for.
A while back, I was asked, as a satanist, what do I want from life. Simply put, I want to live. As far as I'm concerned, we are born once, we live once, and we die once. No rewards for wasting your life, no punishments for living. So what does this mean?
Life is a wonderful thing, our bodies have sences that allow us to experience the world around us. My goal in life is to experience all the pleasures of this world before I have to leave it. Tastes, smells, touches, sights and sounds, anything that is pleasent to me I wish to enjoy. What do I want from life? I want to live.
What do I have to die for? Truth is absolutely nothing. No heaven nor hell. As a result I am not particularly eager to die. Not entirely sure how satanists can be considered death obsessed. If anything, most theist religions promise a superior life after their current if one wavers certain natural rights like sex or eating certain foods or other things ranging from odd to unreasonable. Some as we have seen are willing to lay down their lives for their religion, either being tortured to death during a forced conversion or ramming a plane into a skyscraper.
That is however not to say a satanist won't risk his or her life for a loved one. Just that he or she will attempt to find a way to save the loved one as well if possible.
Life is a wonderful thing, our bodies have sences that allow us to experience the world around us. My goal in life is to experience all the pleasures of this world before I have to leave it. Tastes, smells, touches, sights and sounds, anything that is pleasent to me I wish to enjoy. What do I want from life? I want to live.
What do I have to die for? Truth is absolutely nothing. No heaven nor hell. As a result I am not particularly eager to die. Not entirely sure how satanists can be considered death obsessed. If anything, most theist religions promise a superior life after their current if one wavers certain natural rights like sex or eating certain foods or other things ranging from odd to unreasonable. Some as we have seen are willing to lay down their lives for their religion, either being tortured to death during a forced conversion or ramming a plane into a skyscraper.
That is however not to say a satanist won't risk his or her life for a loved one. Just that he or she will attempt to find a way to save the loved one as well if possible.
On Human Sacrifice
What is human sacrifice and who practices it? Throughout history, there have been stories and evidence of cultures killing people to appease the gods they worshiped, often as part of a ritual. And yet do these ritual killings still go on? During the late 70s to the early 90s there was scandal after scandal supposedly exposing human sacrifices among “satanic cults”. Stories of people, many of them children or even babies murdered to please the Christian devil. And yet, the ones making these claims often have human sacrifice approved in their sacred texts. An example is the biblical story of Jephthah, the story of a man chosen to liberate the Israelites from the rule of the Ammonites who vows to the Judaeo-Christian god that if he is victorious he will sacrifice whom greets him first when he returned home. His daughter greeted him and he killed her and burnt her body. The New Testament book Hebrews would later regard Jephthah as a hero of faith among David, Samson and Samuel.
But does human sacrifice still happen to this day? Even to this day, there are those willing to kill for their gods, in hopes of securing a place in post death paradise. Perhaps the most known example was the atrocity known simply by the date of the event, September 11th. Here zealots sacrificed not only themselves, but countless innocent lives to their god. Other examples include the murder of abortion doctors, the murder of homosexual people.
A word of advice to those who indulge in the myth of SRA. Look at your own past, hell just look at the news. You have blood on your own hands.
But does human sacrifice still happen to this day? Even to this day, there are those willing to kill for their gods, in hopes of securing a place in post death paradise. Perhaps the most known example was the atrocity known simply by the date of the event, September 11th. Here zealots sacrificed not only themselves, but countless innocent lives to their god. Other examples include the murder of abortion doctors, the murder of homosexual people.
A word of advice to those who indulge in the myth of SRA. Look at your own past, hell just look at the news. You have blood on your own hands.
Justice, does it work?
“Justice.” Pretty word isn’t it? Supposedly means keeping order in society and making sure the righteous are rewarded and the guilty punished. Seems simple right? So why does it seem so complicated? From what I have seen from various sources, the process seems to be, someone commits a crime, the police investigate, if they can find the trail to the one responsible evidence is gathered, the person arrested and then charges are brought. The person is brought to trial, on the rare occasion they plead guilty, they are sentenced and punishment given. However, if a not guilty plea is given, the lawyers argue to the judge what evidence is presentable to the jury, it could be a damning video of the deed being done but still ruled out because it was taken without consent or some other technicality. Maybe it was a gun with only the person’s finger prints and bullets that match the one in a body. Either way, a murderer could walk free.
.. ..
Supposing then a conviction has been granted. Sentencing can sometimes be disproportionate to the crime. An example would be in recent news of a very young boy, known in the media as “Baby P”. A child who for 8 of his 17 month life in horrific agony at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend and someone else living with them at the time. The mother has been held until “She is no longer a threat to small children”. The boyfriend had been given at least 12 years and the lodger at least 3. However this is not the end of it. Social workers who had failed to take actions dispite repeated checks on the child and calls from concerned people. The people have been sacked and rightly so, yet they themselves cry out for “justice” by attempting to sue for compensation.
.. ..
So, does our system of justice work, or is there room for improvement, or a complete overhaul? During this age of CCTV, DNA testing, and various other forensic breakthroughs, does the process need to take as long as it does? And what of the punishments? I personally believe they should fit the nature and extent of the crime. Those who would beat, torture and kill children should come to a fitting end. “But what of the chance of rehabilitation? How can they learn their lessons if they are dead?” If permited to live, would they really learn their lessons or would they carry on as if their incarceration never happened? “So what would be the point?” The point is to show other would be child torturers/killers that it will not be tolerated and if you can act so inhumane, you will not have “human rights” to protect you. If you are a rapist, you are violating the sexual freedom of others and therefore should be expected to forfeit your own. I suggest surgically removing of reproductive hardware in such a case. If you steal, you must be made to give to the victim objects or funds or combination thereof to the victim. And if any evidence is damning, regardless of circumstances of its acquisition, then it must be used. Only swift, hard justice is true justice. Anything else, is simply a waste of time.
.. ..
Supposing then a conviction has been granted. Sentencing can sometimes be disproportionate to the crime. An example would be in recent news of a very young boy, known in the media as “Baby P”. A child who for 8 of his 17 month life in horrific agony at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend and someone else living with them at the time. The mother has been held until “She is no longer a threat to small children”. The boyfriend had been given at least 12 years and the lodger at least 3. However this is not the end of it. Social workers who had failed to take actions dispite repeated checks on the child and calls from concerned people. The people have been sacked and rightly so, yet they themselves cry out for “justice” by attempting to sue for compensation.
.. ..
So, does our system of justice work, or is there room for improvement, or a complete overhaul? During this age of CCTV, DNA testing, and various other forensic breakthroughs, does the process need to take as long as it does? And what of the punishments? I personally believe they should fit the nature and extent of the crime. Those who would beat, torture and kill children should come to a fitting end. “But what of the chance of rehabilitation? How can they learn their lessons if they are dead?” If permited to live, would they really learn their lessons or would they carry on as if their incarceration never happened? “So what would be the point?” The point is to show other would be child torturers/killers that it will not be tolerated and if you can act so inhumane, you will not have “human rights” to protect you. If you are a rapist, you are violating the sexual freedom of others and therefore should be expected to forfeit your own. I suggest surgically removing of reproductive hardware in such a case. If you steal, you must be made to give to the victim objects or funds or combination thereof to the victim. And if any evidence is damning, regardless of circumstances of its acquisition, then it must be used. Only swift, hard justice is true justice. Anything else, is simply a waste of time.
Ignorence is Strength
Centuries ago, people 'knew' the world was flat and the sun revolved around it. Now we know the world is a large sphere orbiting a larger sphere we know as the sun. As our undestanding of the universe grows, we have a shrinking need for faith.
Yet, the faithfull choose to ignore certain idea because they conflict with scriptures. The theory of evolution, the idea of different species of animals decending from simpler lifeforms, continues to be attacked by these who dogmatically accept the stories in their scriptures.
Despite the evidence for evolution, transitional fossils, genetic makeups, and such, the theists will either flat out deny or minimise their importance.
Some cite the apparent 'perfection' of the 'design' of the earth. Yeah, such as unhospitable lands, natural disasters such as volcanoes, tidal waves, hurricanes and such, organs such as the appendix that serve herbivore animals well, but only serve to kill humans. Perfect design? only to a malicious jerk.
Like it or not, we are the product of natural selection, the evidence is overwhelming.
Teaching creation in public schools? It's like teaching alchemy ir magic ritual. Not very practical. The question of who's creationism arises. Do we teach about Xenu? Ra? There's a lot of religions out there. Not just yous. If you want attention, don't ignore others.
Yet, the faithfull choose to ignore certain idea because they conflict with scriptures. The theory of evolution, the idea of different species of animals decending from simpler lifeforms, continues to be attacked by these who dogmatically accept the stories in their scriptures.
Despite the evidence for evolution, transitional fossils, genetic makeups, and such, the theists will either flat out deny or minimise their importance.
Some cite the apparent 'perfection' of the 'design' of the earth. Yeah, such as unhospitable lands, natural disasters such as volcanoes, tidal waves, hurricanes and such, organs such as the appendix that serve herbivore animals well, but only serve to kill humans. Perfect design? only to a malicious jerk.
Like it or not, we are the product of natural selection, the evidence is overwhelming.
Teaching creation in public schools? It's like teaching alchemy ir magic ritual. Not very practical. The question of who's creationism arises. Do we teach about Xenu? Ra? There's a lot of religions out there. Not just yous. If you want attention, don't ignore others.
Freedom is Slavery
While going to and fro in London and going up and down in the city, I was warned by a preacher about the “evils” of indulgence. That trying to live your life your way, no matter how responsible you are makes you a “slave” to your desires. People who know me my indulgences can vary greatly. True I enjoy lustful activities. But I also like reading, walking, sightseeing, eating tasty foods, drinking beverages alcoholic or not. I can’t see enjoying my life as slavery. To me, slavery is having to give up your pleasures to serve a master, be it a god or a worldly being. Too many “Thou shalt not”s for my liking. Believe in what you want and do as you please, but don’t call me a slave for being free, and don’t sell me slavery packaged as freedom. In fact, why don’t you try some of the “forbidden fruit” yourself? Try to enjoy life a bit. You won’t surely die if you live for at least one day.
War is Peace
As far as I can remember, there has always been a conflicted between nations. I remember vaguely the news reports of the Gulf War. The conflict of Israel and Palestine has raged on for decades with no end in sight. War has become a way of life to us. Throughout time man has had the need for conflict in a large scale. Whether it is a simple need to conquer or the annihilation of a nation who worships differently, wars continue to devastate. But does war serve any other purpose than to waste human life? Nothing brings people together like war. Leaders have used the threat of an external enemy to rally their followers behind them. War tends to invoke a sense of patriotism and loyalty to their nation, their religion or their cause. Regardless of the enemy’s true motive or intent, they will always be demonised so that the war is justified. Claims that the enemy will strip all freedoms, all rights and liberties the home nation appears to enjoy (according to the propaganda anyway)
War is a useful tool for the ruler. You can invoke loyalty and pride from your followers, any misgivings about you, you can redirect to your enemy. You can also use the war to justify forcing opponents to your viewpoints to accept them, be they friend or foe. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”
War is a useful tool for the ruler. You can invoke loyalty and pride from your followers, any misgivings about you, you can redirect to your enemy. You can also use the war to justify forcing opponents to your viewpoints to accept them, be they friend or foe. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”
My thoughts
I shall do my blogging here as opposed to using Myspace. This shall be linked to my facebook and Vice Versa.
http://www.facebook.com/#/LordSymos?ref=name
Some of my opinions may not be pretty but they are my thoughts.
http://www.facebook.com/#/LordSymos?ref=name
Some of my opinions may not be pretty but they are my thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
