Archive for April, 2012

The Goodness Of God – A Perplexing Paradox

Posted in Uncategorized on April 29, 2012 by Al Stefanelli

(This is a transcript of Al Stefanelli’s “Voice Of Reason” segment on my American Heathen® Internet Radio Show)

“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” – Steven Weinberg

If something is good simply because a god has commanded it, then anything that a god commands could be considered good. Of course, this means that the very nature of the diverse interpretations of holy books and the resultant actions that are perpetrated on our society gives no way to predict what god might desire next. Ergo, bashing babies on rocks, flying airplanes into buildings and murdering physicians would just as likely be as good as loving your enemy, giving to the poor and taking care of widows and orphans.

On the other hand, if god given commandments are based on the inherent goodness of an act, then we have a standard of goodness independent of god. Thus, a god cannot be the source of morality and we must seek it though the world in which we have evolved. And we have found it. 

Enlightened Self Interest…

Enlightened Self Interest is behavior that maximizes the intensity and duration of personal gratification while cooperating with others in a selfless, altruistic manner. But, cooperation is a two-way street. By default, it demands reciprocity. This is where justice comes in. Justice determines fairness, allowing cooperation to operate at peak efficiency.

Enlightened self-interest is both moral and ethical because it encompasses desire for personal happiness, the happiness of others, justice and cooperation. This is not selfishness, because from a secular point of view, selfishness is both immoral and unethical. It promotes behavior that often results in harm coming to others, which makes them unhappy, and in turn, makes us unhappy. Thus, in the words of Abraham Lincoln,

“When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That’s my religion.”

The task of moral education is to help people to predict the consequences of actions they are considering. What will the long-term, short-term and immediate rewards be, and what will be the drawbacks? This is the basis for morality and ethics. No holy book, fear of punishment or reward by a mythical and non-existent deity is needed because evolution and natural selection have already solved the problem for us.

Religion, The Bad Apple In The Bushel…

Religion and it’s accompanying unnatural degradations, bigotry and intolerance are the result of vain attempts by ignorant men of long ago to accommodate human needs by basing moral and ethical behavior on the perceived commands and desires of mythical deities with bad attitudes. Religious morality is counter-productive to the survival of our species.

If we do not plant our ethics in the improvable and adaptable soil of science, then natural selection and our own willful ignorance will insure our demise in short order.

When mystical elements are introduced into morality, the whole system ends up being corrupted. A supernaturally based morality is removed from the natural human realm, where it is needed, and placed in an imaginary one. This removes human responsibility and allows horrific acts of violence to be passed off as morally acceptable if only for the sole reason that someone believes a god told them to do it. If you do not agree, then consider how religion can justify as morally acceptable actions such as genital mutilation, honor killings and flying airplanes into buildings. These are only a minuscule example of what happens when non-empirical and competing ideologies are flooded into a multi-cultural society. Serious doctrinal disputes often result in war and terrorism.

The basis of any religious moral code centers around the superstitious and imaginary dream world of those who have devised the code. This dream world cannot be verified by facts or observation, but must be accepted on faith alone. The basis of a secular moral code is human need. The understanding that what is good supports basic human rights and anything that threatens it is bad. We do not need a supernatural deity or an ancient holy book to determine this.

If we stay the course of what religion interprets as morality then the mysticism of the cult-du-jour will completely prevail over logic and reason and we will retrogress into barbarism where the death penalty is the required punishment for adulterers, homosexuals, disobedient children and countless other people. There are sitting US politicians that already believe these characteristics should be punishable by death.

Reason, Not Delusion, Continues To Advance Our Societies…

In spite of our societies being steeped in religion, every advancement we have made toward a tolerant society has come about through our use of reason. Reason is what defines humanity and insisting upon using faith to acquire knowledge flies in the face of everything that we have achieved as a race because doing so requires us to accept the imaginary as tangible, which is nothing more than an escape from reality.

This is known as delusion, and it is, for lack of a better definition, mental illness. It should come as no surprise when a religious person draws a completely different conclusion about reality than someone who uses logic and reason as their tools. The indoctrinated bases their world view on the arbitrary and the subjective, and encompasses their perceptions based on what they understand to be the desire and will of their deity. This process is almost completely emotional. Reliance is not based on objectivity, but unquestionable intuition that is not to be examined on a deeper level unless it does not veer from their scripture.

The end result is the believer being devoid of objective standards and each person of faith interpreting truth and morality in their own way. Subjective morality is problematic because it requires definition solely on the prejudices of their religious organization, leaving them without a discernible ability to determine right from wrong, rendering morality meaningless. This is irony at its zenith, because most fundamentalists preach against moral relativity. The cause of society’s moral collapse is religion, itself.

When a society removes moral responsibility by belief that the acquisition of knowledge comes from an unknown and mysterious venue, it loses its ability for rational conceptualization of values because they are stripped from the reality of this life and placed in an imaginary next life, which is a recipe for disaster. As we have seen, separate and subjective moral value systems are not conducive to conflict resolution in any way other than ultimately using force. The history of religion is a history of war. Another problem with rejecting reason as the foundation for morality is that anything that is contradictory to the religionist’s world view is rejected purely by emotion. Thus, we have a very well documented anti-intellectual attitude at the core of most religions, and this is promoted in their holy books, as well. Eve’s sin of eating from the tree of knowledge is a perfect example.

Self-Esteem v. Self-Degradation…

Plainly, there is nothing mysterious about morality. All we need is healthy self-esteem, the desire to learn and compassion for each other and we have won most of the fight to becoming a moral person. Christianity promotes the belief that humanity is born into the world already depraved and compares us as filthy rags in the sight of God’s eyes. Reason or logic doesn’t even come into the picture, but they cling to the belief that only the bible, with its primitive system of rewards and punishments, can hold society together. What they fail to understand is that much of the decay of modern society is due to the unquestioning acceptance of religious dogma and doctrine.

Religious morality is harmful and benefits no one. There is nothing inherently positive about pursuing a “higher” morality. It is detrimental to the health of the individual and to society when a literal acceptance of any “holy” book is adopted. It results in a false view of reality, destroys self-esteem and causes division on many different levels.

Reality Check…

There is no god, there have never been any gods and the various saviors that are worshiped throughout the world, including the character portrayed as Jesus Christ have likely never existed. The fact that billions of people believe in gods does not reflect anything other than evidence of mass delusion. If our species is to survive, we must remove ourselves from the self-induced mental torture chamber that is religion.

Rebellious, Childish, Eccentric… Me

Posted in Uncategorized on April 28, 2012 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 04/28/12)


When I was 13 my parents divorced. It was 1974.  The divorce was sudden, totally unexpected, and utterly devastating to the entire family.  In retrospect, while it was the single most destructive aspect of my life at the time, it later proved to be the single most positive educational experience of my lifetime up to this point.  What that moment in time taught me I will never forget. It taught me to always question authority, ask lots of questions, demand comprehensive, meaningful answers, and as I’ve grown older, never accept the idea that growing old requires tossing rebellion and childishness away in favor of fake civility.

My nemesis in life has always been unfettered, unquestioned authority. I’ve always rebelled against authority because the basic question of “Why?” is never answered sufficiently by people who claim authority over me for whatever manufactured reason.  As a young man, I wasn’t satisfied with the simple, trite, and often times glib answers provided to me by authority figures. Everyone tried it. My parents, teachers, everyone. I didn’t buy it. Today I’m no different. And simply telling me, “Because I said so” has been, and always will be, an invitation for me to tell anyone and everyone to fuck off. The more folks gloss over, or simply ignore my question of “Why?”, the more fierce and determined I become to learn the truth.  Why?  A  child doesn’t stop asking “Why?” do they?  I kept my inner child. I  haven’t stopped asking the question “Why?”.  And my inner child will only die when I do.

Children like the question of “Why?”  The answers to the question of “Why?” are infinite. But, meaningful answers are harder to come by. I like that though. It is my inner child’s question of “Why?” that pushes me forward, my childhood curiosity, alive and well, leading the way. I want meaningful answers. So, I keep asking.

I kept the important parts of being a child.  The one’s that inspire creativity, fantasy, hopes and dreams. The one’s that ignore social dogmas of propriety, empty discretion, and fake civility. You see, I really hate plastic. But, it’s because of this that I’m often accused of being a child, a boy, a foolhardy, reckless, angry clown, by people who think they have all the answers.  I take that as a compliment.  For it is my inner child that keeps me from becoming a bitter, desperate, lonely, rotting biological fossil of aging static tradition, trapped in a padded cell of self-induced “ignorance is bliss”.

Over the last 20 years I’ve become very eccentric. I’m an odd collection of childlike behaviors and adult memes with a deep primal commitment and passion for vital humanistic ideals.  I’m quite strange by American societal standards. I look like I could rip your head off, act like I’m 10-15 years old at times, have a sense of humor than runs the gambit from stupidly silly to disgustingly gross. I’m really a pussy cat though.  But, don’t let that get out.  It could ruin my reputation and piss off my publicist. I’m married to a wonderful woman. My marriage really isn’t supposed to be working because we are from two different worlds. Sherry, my wife… a girl from the country, family oriented, college educated, career driven… Me, a bad boy from the big city and the wrong side of the tracks, a broken family, former wandering juvenile delinquent, a biker, an entertainer, an instigator, a high school dropout who got his GED at 33, and then did one year of college.  30 years ago everyone said the marriage would never last. Why?  Good question huh?  But, then, there are a lot of things that many people have told me would never work.

I’m strange. There’s no doubt about it. I proudly admit it. I’m ridiculously open. I wear my heart on my sleeve. I’m sexually deviant in a normal sort of way. For example… I’m strangely attracted to women in latex.  I have a shoe fetish.  OK.  I have a LOT of fetishes.  I don’t care who knows. But, you know what? I’m not outside the norm really.  The only difference between me and most others is that I just choose to reveal my truths as opposed to hiding them.  And, I must admit to enjoying the reactions of folks to my openness.  I measure individual character by how they react to me.  I hate hiding.  Never liked it as a kid, don’t like it now.  Remember, I hate plastic. And people who hide behind plastic live in fear, and if they are afraid, then how can I trust them to watch my back?

But, anyway… Look, I don’t pose a danger to the public. Really!  Yeah, I’m eccentric. I watch TV Land, am hooked on the Science Channel, talk to my dogs, my bird, myself… even my balls and my dick from time to time. I amuse myself.  Yeah, I’m a bit of a recluse too.  I have always had trust issues, and even though I’m outgoing and enjoy entertaining, I hate crowds and don’t like to be around people I don’t know. Yeah, I’m pretty strange. Here’s how I would describe myself in a sentence… I’m a 10 to 15 year old, biker, musician, broadcasting, entertainer, comedian, bad ass geek with a penchant for anything and everything out of the ordinary, as long as it doesn’t hurt someone else or infringe upon their human rights. WOW!  And really, that’s the short version!  Yeah.  I’m a child.

The truth is that children are eccentric.  What makes them eccentric is the fact that they haven’t been taught to be otherwise.  There are no filters.  Adult indoctrination really doesn’t kick in until somewhere in the 20th year when the social morality police kidnap the unsuspecting and force them into the appropriate attire, disembowel their curiosity, and throw them to the wolves of ignorance. Then they become sheeple, beaten into submission by the utterance of the word “adult”.

So, what’s this diatribe all about?  Consider this…

The greatest choice we make in our lives is whether or not we want to grow old gracefully or burn out after a hard and fast re-entry.  I associate the word “gracefully” with slow, methodical, unrelenting, painful, decay. Burning out after a hard and fast re-entry, on the other hand… that’s a more youthful, reckless (within reason), humorous, and fun approach to growing old. I’ve made the choice to flame out on re-entry. I will not go peacefully into that goodnight.  Indeed, I will do everything possible to relinquish that idea to the trash heap of pitiful Geritol surrenders. No regrets.

If you asked me today if I would change anything about my life… If you asked me today if I have any regrets for what I have ever done, good or bad… My answer to both questions would be a flat “NO!”.  Who I am today is a direct result of having lived almost everything yesterday.  And, no matter what I have done, good or bad, I wouldn’t be who I am today if I hadn’t lived it.  My rebellion, my childishness, my eccentricity… they are me.  It is who I am and what I am.  I refuse to let time crush the valuable qualities that have brought me this far, that continue to teach me lessons and inspire my creativity, my hopes, my dreams, my vision of a future that betters all of us.  Yeah… Go ahead and call me a rebel, a child, an eccentric.  But, before you condemn those qualities to the scrap heap of plastic adult platitudes… take a good long look into any child’s eyes.  Then try and remember how excited you were when, through your young eyes, the world looked and felt so much better than it actually was. The only limit back then was how far you were willing to let your childish imagination run free.  Now, combine that with a sharp mind, years of experience, and many lessons learned.  Ah yes… I was born a child, I will die a child. A child who lived.

Rebellious, Childish, Eccentric.  Yep.  That’s me.

This Week In Freethought History April 22nd – 28th

Posted in Politics, Religion, Science on April 28, 2012 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of a LIVE broadcast by John Mill. John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster. “This Week In Freethought” airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment: 04/28/12)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History: This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

Last Sunday, April 22, marked a birthday and an anniversary—

It’s American actor Jack Nicholson’s 75th birthday (1937). Nicholson has been nominated 12 times for Academy Awards, winning for Best Actor in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1975) and in As Good as It Gets (2003). For Terms of Endearment, Nicholson won Best Supporting Actor (1983). In an 1992 interview in Vanity Fair magazine, Nicholson said, “I don’t believe in God now,” but he added, “I can still work up an envy for someone who has a faith. I can see how that could be a deeply soothing experience.” This quote might have informed the screenwriter of Nicholson’s 2007 film, The Bucket List, in which Nicholson’s character says, “I envy people who have faith, I just can’t get my head around it.”

And 148 years ago last Sunday the US Congress passed an act requiring coins, for the first time since the nation was founded, to include a recognition of God (1864). Replacing the Latin motto, E Pluribus Unum – “Out of many, one” – was one that everyone could read, if not subscribe to: “In God We Trust.” How did this happen? A Rev Watkinson urged replacing the Goddess of Liberty with a religious slogan on US coinage, writing to Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase, “You are probably a Christian” … “Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation?” A religious slogan, wrote the cleric, “would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed.” And even though the motto was conceived by a cleric, recommended for its religious purpose, and adopted precisely to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God, several federal courts have since ruled that “In God We Trust” on our coins – and, since 1954, our currency, is not a religious phrase! What’s troubling is that Nazi Germany had a very similar motto: Gott mit uns (“God with us”). We can suppose the Nazis, too, have been spared the “ignominy of heathenism”!

It was last Monday, April 23, that German physicist Max Planck was born (1858). Planck invented quantum theory and developed a formula to predict how the radiation an object emits is related to its temperature, known today as Planck’s Constant. Planck received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1918. Though publicly he wrote (1932), “Religion belongs to that realm that is inviolable before the law of causation and therefore is closed to science,” one biographer observed that Planck was “far removed from all dogmatic, mystery-mongering beings.” Planck’s God, it seemed, was nothing more than an “ideal Sprit.” His beliefs could be described as pantheist, but certainly not Christian. Planck did not believe in a future life.

It was last Monday, April 23, 448 years ago, that the greatest poet and playwright in the English language, William Shakespeare, was baptized, so this is taken as his birthday (1564). Shakespeare is known to be the author of about 38 plays, 154 sonnets, two long narrative poems, and several other poems. Because few records of Shakespeare’s private life survive, scholars have freely speculated about his religious beliefs. Whereas some scholars suggest The Bard may have been an atheist, and even the Catholic Encyclopedia wonders if “Shakespeare was not infected with the atheism, which was rampant in the more cultured society of the Elizabethan age,” all we can say with certainty is that, in a time when it was a serious offense to be an unfaithful Christian and to skip church services, William Shakespeare said some things no Christian should have said and failed to do some things that a Christian should have done.

Last Tuesday, April 24, was the 212th anniversary of the founding of the world’s largest library, the Library of Congress (1800). The Library’s current collection of 147 million items includes materials in 460 languages, including books, maps, monographs, dissertations, periodicals, voice and music recordings, and 14 million images. The Library of Congress is the largest library ever to exist. The collection and recording of the sum of human knowledge for the betterment of humankind was not a high priority in the Ages of Faith in Christian Europe, or for most of the history of the Muslim East. The idea of human progress was a secular humanist achievement. It is therefore dishonest to crow about the great libraries of the Middle Ages, and the romantic fiction of the monks preserving the classics, without telling us just how many volumes these great Christian libraries comprised. In the solidly Christian period of 500 to 1300, not a library can be found in all of Europe with more that 2,000 volumes, many of them copies of the same title. In the greatest abbey of the 13th century, the Abbey of St. Gall, not a single monk could read!

Last Wednesday, April 25, was the 59th anniversary of the article published in Nature magazine describing the structure of DNA in terms of the now-familiar double helix – by James D. Watson and Francis Crick (1953). True scientists both, they characterized their discovery as a scientific theory, meaning that their assertion is not only subject to independent verification, but also innately falsifiable. Both won the Nobel Prize in 1962. Francis Crick published a book, The Astonishing Hypothesis (1994), in which he states, “The Astonishing Hypothesis is that You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.” In 1996, Richard Dawkins interviewed James Watson for a film broadcast by the BBC and asked if Watson knew many scientists with strong religious convictions. “Virtually none,” said Watson. “Occasionally, I meet them and I’m a bit embarrassed because I can’t believe that anyone accepts truth by revelation.”

Last Thursday, April 26, was the 1,891st birthday of the 16th Roman Emperor, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121). Marcus had the bad fortune to inherit the Empire during a dangerous age. And it was to Marcus that the Christian apologists Justin Martyr (103-165) and Athenagoras of Athens (133-190) defended Christianity (Apology, 176/177). But Marcus had no patience with any kind of superstition, saying, “I learned from Diognetus not to give credit to what was said by miracle-workers, and about the driving away of demons and such things.” It is instructive to note that the Christians had to defend themselves against the charge of atheism, not because they believed in no god, but because they believed in the wrong god! Marcus Aurelius didn’t believe in immortality and, in his Meditations, written in Greek, he conspicuously neglects the idea of a supreme being. The Meditations are still read today, but the apologetics of Justin and Athenagoras are not.

Yesterday, April 27, was the birthday of two famous Freethinkers—

It was on April 27, 253 years ago, that English feminist and radical Mary Wollstonecraft was born (1759). She was largely self-educated and an unusual student, with the radical idea that women should be educated on a par with men. Wollstonecraft found she had a talent for writing, and publishers to promote her, so she published her theories in Thoughts on the Education of Daughters (1786). She continued to argue that the rights of men and the rights of women were the same rights. This culminated in her Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792, the seminal document in the history of modern feminism. Wollstonecraft associated with a radical intellectual group including Thomas Paine and William Godwin. She married Godwin and, in 1797, died of complications associated with childbirth – ten days after she gave birth to the future author of the classic novel Frankenstein.

It was also on April 27, but 190 years ago, that the 18th President of the United States, Ulysses S. Grant, was born (1822). At the close of the American Civil War, the commanding general of the U.S. armies was the most popular man in the country. He was elected president and served two terms, from 1869-1877. However, his administration was marred by a tolerance of corruption, so that he left office as unpopular as he was popular when first elected. Grant was not a member of any church. He was, however, a staunch defender of church-state separation. In a speech in Des Moines, Iowa, in 1875, he unequivocally supported public schools over religious schools, saying, “Encourage free schools, and resolve that not one dollar of money be appropriated to the support of any sectarian school… Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the Church, and the private schools, supported entirely by private contributions. KEEP CHURCH AND STATE FOREVER SEPARATE.”

Today, April 28, marks two theological anniversaries—

It was on April 28, 274 years ago, that Pope Clement XII issued the first papal decree against the Freemasons (1738), an organization of obscure origins, possibly a survival of the Ancient Roman guilds or unions that supported the craft and its members. Modern Freemasonry dates only from 1717, with the formation of the Grand Lodge of England. Clement’s condemnatory Constitution insisted on the objectionable character of societies that commit men of all or no religion to a system of mere natural righteousness, without reference to Mary or Jesus or even the Pope. It wasn’t until 1877 that the French variety of Freemasonry cut out references to the “Grand Architect” and, consequently, declined to require a belief in God or immortality. This caused a split between the English-speaking and the French-speaking lodges.

It was on April 28, but 1150 years ago, that the bishops of Lorraine, in the Synod of Aachen, approved a divorce between King Lothair II and his wife Theutberga, so that he could marry Waldrada and get an heir (862).This pretty much puts the lie to the Roman Catholic Church’s claim of taking a hard line on the “indissolubility of marriage.” There is no evidence from pre-Christian times that allowing divorce led to evil or even immorality, and plenty of evidence from the Christian era that the reverse is true. The Church really only began to impede divorce in the 9th century, and it wasn’t until the 11th century and the time of Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand) that marriage and divorce were really regulated, along with the celibacy of the clergy. Nobody took to well to either innovation. Divorce was finally, after a long struggle, officially forbidden by the Council of Trent, 1545-1563. But there were always ways around that, if not by legalisms making the marriage null and void in the first place, which became a vast profit center for the Church; then by lack of “internal consent”; or by threat of force, as King Henry VIII learned. This affected the morals of Europe by ushering in about two centuries of adultery, natural and unnatural vice, and flagrant prostitution – until the Age of Reason arrived and shamed the heads of church and state into curtailing these excesses.

Other Freethinkers born this week—
April 22 Immanuel Kant (1724)
April 23 Stephen A. Douglas (1813)
April 23 Joseph Turner (1775)
April 26 Eugene Delacroix (1798)

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to my blog, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

A Specialist’s Perspective

Posted in Science on April 28, 2012 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of  co-host 2Buck Chuck’s (Dr. Charles A. Doswell III) segment “Leading Horses To Water” which airs on my American Heathen® radio show.  Chuck is a world-renowned scientist in the field of meteorology.  Air date of this particular segment – 04/28/12)

Ancient Greeks began the way of thinking originally known as natural philosophy but which we now call science. Science emerged as we know it during the Renaissance, in an age dominated by fear, superstition, injustice, and brutality. In other words, pretty much like the present. These musings are aimed at explaining how science works, and how science can serve even nonscientists in their efforts to make sense of the world. I can try to explain things but it’s up to you to decide whether or not you wish to drink from these waters.

Science has fractionated into many disciplines and subdisciplines since the Renaissance. As any body of knowledge expands, it becomes increasingly difficult to know it all, so scientists have been becoming rather specialized over the years and know most about only some small part of science. My particular discipline is meteorology and my primary subdiscipline is severe storms. Becoming a scientist involves learning basic principles in broad disciplines, such as general physics or biology, and developing skills, such as mathematics or computer programming. These become foundational elements in developing one’s specialized interests. The knowledge and skills needed vary with the topic of specialization.

One problem with being a specialist in anything is that you see things from a perspective that isn’t shared with many others. It can be difficult to communicate your understanding of some topic simply because that understanding is based on a specialist’s knowledge base. I want to use an example from my field to try to make this clear.

In the spring of 2011, we had some really big tornado outbreaks that resulted in tragically high death tolls. In the last 30 years, every time a big tornado outbreak has occurred, the news media descend on meteorologists, wanting answers to questions like, “Why has the weather gone mad?” or “What caused this freak event?” With all the public media controversy about global climate change – a controversy not present within the global climate change science community – we get questions like, “Are worse things than even this event in store for us because of global warming?” or “Does this event signal the climate change induced beginning of more such storms to come?”

To lay persons (including the typical scientifically ignorant media reporters), it may seem like the weather has gone mad, but to someone who’s spent decades studying these storms and the historical record of them, big tornado outbreaks simply are natural hazards that occur when the conditions for them come together on a particular day. Seen against the backdrop of the historical record, a major tornado outbreak isn’t a freak event; it’s just another example of what’s happened in the past and surely will happen again in the future. And tornado outbreaks are weather events – the climate is the long-term average of the weather – so any particular weather event says pretty much nothing about the climate and how it might or might not be changing.

What we know about the weather and its relationship to climate tells us that even if the average temperature of the planet is increasing, the winters will still be cold and blizzards will still happen. A particularly hot day in the summer doesn’t signal global warming. What’s characteristic of the weather is variability – the weather changes all the time, from day to day, from month to month, from year to year. A single weather event is but one piece of data that goes into the climate. On the average, winter days are colder than summer days, but if you search the record, you can find warm winter days and cold summer days. It’s only when you do the averaging over time does the climate emerge.

From my specialist’s perspective, I know that that past is a key to anticipating the future; what has happened before will happen again. We can imagine tragic tornado outbreaks in the future, but can’t seem to convey that to a public that grows complacent within a few years after major events. Tornadoes? Yeah, I suppose they happen somewhere but surely not here! Surely not now! Why should I prepare for something that probably won’t happen to me in my lifetime?

Such complacency is simply a matter of not having my specialist’s perspective. Although tornado outbreaks are rare, they also are inevitable somewhere, sometime. And complacency means that when another major tornado outbreak occurs, such as happened several times during 2011, and again in 2012 naturally, unprepared people will make poor decisions and become casualties.

As I see it, we specialists have an obligation to do our best to share our perspectives. We have to try to help people who aren’t specialists understand our point of view. That’s why I’m doing this. After all, our careers as scientists are bankrolled by taxes, for the most part, and we should seek to give something back to our societies for the privilege of a career in science. But the public (yes, that includes you!) also has a responsibility to serve their own best interests and not remain willfully ignorant of information that can save their lives. They have to be receptive to the message we’re trying to convey, and to deal with the unfortunate situation that the media fill the public with misinformation, for the most part. Even the public has to work to separate the wheat from the chaff. When it comes to understanding the natural world about us, ignorance and misinformation can get you killed, so it’s in your best interest to make the effort.

Science is not a religion but rather a tool for those who wish to think for themselves about the natural world. Its primary characteristic is its willingness to entertain questions from those who wish to obtain believable answers.

Storm Trooper Tactics Against Pregnant Woman Granted “Qualified Immunity”

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized on April 28, 2012 by hewhay

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Yahweh Speaks” by Yahweh.  Yahweh is an assumed name to protect his identity on-line.  He is a noted  free thought advocate and Constitutional attorney.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Airdate 04/28/12)

“Here is what happened to Malaika Brooks, a pregnant mother, as she was driving her son to school one day: Two, soon three, police officers surrounded her. The officers thought she was speeding in a school zone; she says she was not. Brooks provided her identification when asked, so there was no doubt who she was or where to find her. The officers wrote her a ticket but she refused to sign it. Refusing to sign a speeding ticket was at the time a nonarrestable misdemeanor; now, in Washington, it is not even that.1 Brooks had no weapons and had not harmed or threatened to harm a soul. Although she had told the officers she was seven months pregnant, they proceeded to use a Taser on her, not once but three times, causing her to scream with pain and leaving burn marks and permanent scars.” Justice Berzon, Cirxuit Judge in dissent.

She brought suit against the Officers using what is called a Section 1983 action for violation of her Constitutional rights The Federal District Court granted summary Judgment in favor of the Police Officers saying they had “qualified immunity”. She appealed that decision to a 3 Judge Panel of the Ninth Circuit, which rejected her right to have a full factual hearing, affirming the Trial Court’s determination the Cops had “qualified immunity”. The majority opinion said, “The Taser was used three times in this case, which constitutes a greater application of force than a single tasing. Nonetheless, in light of the totality of the circumstances, this does not push the use of force into the realm of excessive. After the first use, Brooks did not communicate that she was willing to comply with the Officers’ commands, but instead started yelling and honking her horn, which would likely have been perceived by the Officers as an escalation of her resistance. The same behavior followed the second tasing. The third tasing moved Brooks to the right, at which point Officers Ornelas and Jones were able to extract her from the car. Therefore, while using the Taser three times makes this a closer case, we find that it does not show excessive force in light of the corresponding escalation of Brooks’s resistance and the fact that it was the third tasing that appeared to dislodge her such that the Officers could finally extract her from her car and gain control over her. In conclusion, then, this case presents a less-than intermediate use of force, prefaced by warnings and other attempts to obtain compliance, against a suspect accused of a minor crime, but actively resisting arrest, out of police control, and posing some slight threat to officers. In this situation, we find, assuming all the facts in Brooks’s favor, that the Officers’ behavior did not amount to a constitutional violation.”

This is just another example of the ever on-going onslaught against the fundamental rights of AUTONOMOUS, INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUALS. All the police needed to do was for all three Cops to have signed the ticket, and if the pregnant woman failed to appear in court, a warrant would issue for her arrest, and then under that judicial scrutiny, after tempers had subsided, other officers could have effectuated the arrest. Instead, the Cops used bully -boy, storm trooper tactics to taze 3 times a pregnant women whose ONLY “offense” was to exercise civil disobediance by refusing to sign the ticket. And more appallingly, the Trial Court and Appellate Court have sanctioned such unnecessary and excessive force with CONSTITUTIONAL “qualified immunity”~~~meaning the pregnant women NEVER gets her actual day in court.

I have a keen historical perspective and present working knowledge of the swings of the pendulum with regard to the ever on-going tension between the Constitution as a bulwark against Government intrusion into the lives and rights of Individuals vs the Constitution as a license for such government intrusion. From the “Alien and Sedition Acts”, which made it a crime to criticize the Government, to Lincoln’s suspension of Habeas Corpus, to Plessy V Ferguson, institutionalizing “separate but Equal”, to the criminal convictions of persons merely advocating the overthrow of the US Government, to Japanese-American Citizens deprived of their property and placed in internment camps, to the Patriot Act, and including decisions such as this granting “qualified Immunity” for cops tasering a woman for merely refusing to sign a speeding ticket, I have seen politicians and the Courts consciously eviscerating the rights of individuals in favor of Government power, police power.

Now, this is not to say there have not been notable and noble bright spots~~~Brown V Board, Miranda v Arizona, Murray v Curlett, Abington v Schemp, Roe v Wade, McLean v Board, Lawrence V Texas, Kitzmiller v Dover etc. But, since Nixon’s appointment of Warren Burger I have seen a conscious and purposeful retrenchment against INDIVIDUAL Constitutional rights in favor of “the silent majority”, the “moral majority”, the “social conservatives”, all euphemisms for rampant, unchecked AUTHORITARIANISM. If the Courts approve tasering a pregnant woman for not signing a traffic ticket, if the Courts approve, as they have, full body cavity searches for persons FALSELY arrested on minor offenses, can you imagine what the Courts will sanction when we or posterity find it necessary to do what our Founders did~~~ and proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence;

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”?

I shudder at the image of the brutal response that will be unleashed against such fundamental, inherent, inalienable boldness!

“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neiither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

Ass Scratch Fever!

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 24, 2012 by RJ Evans

We’re Born This Way

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , on April 21, 2012 by RJ Evans

(The following commentary is called “Reflections” by John MillJohn is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster.  This series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show.  Air Date 04/21/12)

As an atheist and materialist, I sometimes wonder why I don’t feel the love from gay people. This is John Mill and perhaps I should rephrase that: it seems that atheists are perfectly willing to stand up for freedom and liberty for the LGBT community, but the favor is rarely returned. Likewise with the African-American community: we welcome black atheists, but the black civil rights community is not conspicuously supportive of us.

It may be because we are all immoral, hell-bound, baby-eaters… or it may be for another reason – a reason for which they are blameless.

I was listening recently to one of my favorite podcasts, “The Best of the Left,” hosted by Jay Tomlinson. I was pleased to hear a rare voice call in: an atheist who was hoping nonbelievers “are the next group to fight for their rights and come out of the closet and not be afraid to say who they are.” Hear, hear, I said to myself. But the host killed my momentary buzz, saying that “equating the civil rights movements of the LGBT community and racial minorities to the struggle for acceptance by atheists” is “an inappropriate comparison.”

And Jay is an atheist! Maybe he’s not as angry or aggressive as we are, those of us who listen to and comment through “American Heathen” – or maybe it’s because his podcast is called “Best of the Left” and not “Voice of the Godless” – but Jay admits that he shares our disbelief in sky-gods. He just thinks the law is already on our side.

I began to think Jay got it all wrong: there are so many examples of anti-atheist discrimination: an atheist can’t get elected to public office; believers are preferred in child custody; atheists can get fired from at-will employment for any reason or no reason; schools can stifle free association if they don’t approve of an atheist group; atheists are under-represented and misrepresented in the media; atheists are repudiated by their families; many famous people were actually nonbelievers, but history classes never teach this; and have you ever noticed that atheists are not one of the protected groups covered by Hate Crimes laws?*

Given a second look, this list conflates public discrimination, which is discrimination as official policy of state or federal government, with private discrimination, or just not being liked. Sure, atheists, are liked a lot less than almost any other group. But does that raise the cause of anti-atheist discrimination to the level of a civil rights issue?

It is true that there seems to be a kind of institutionalized discrimination against atheists in the military. The Army’s Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program spends millions of tax dollars to assert, without scientific evidence, that soldiers must be not just physically fit but spiritually fit. And the spiritual fitness program is biased toward a certain fundamentalist religiosity that critics, myself included, find troubling.

It is also true that in the United States, seven state constitutions (Arkansas, Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and, surprisingly, my own state of Maryland) officially include religious tests that could forbid atheists from holding public office or being a juror or witness at trial. But it is also true that the 1961 Torcaso decision specifically overturned the Maryland religious test, and presumably invalidated all the others.

Yes, it is tougher in life being an atheist. I think we can all agree that discrimination against atheists does exist. But at what point does anti-atheist discrimination become a civil rights violation? And is it on par with discrimination against the LGBT community, women and racial minorities? It is clear that, unlike other rights groups, atheists are not denied equal access to housing, they are not kept from seeing their partners in hospitals, they don’t earn sixty-five cents for every dollar earned by believers, and they are not prevented from voting. And atheists don’t make up 39% of the prison population but only 14% of the general population.

A true civil rights movement is characterized not just by discrimination, but by the politics of some identifiable characteristic. Gays and lesbians have their sexual orientation. African-Americans have their skin color. Women have… well, you get the idea. But the only characteristic atheists have in common is their disbelief.

Atheism is a minority viewpoint and all minority viewpoints are unpopular, if not downright suspicious, among the general public. We atheists can claim to be misunderstood and misrepresented, caricatured and shunned, even painted with the same brush as Hitler – a Roman Catholic who was never excommunicated, by the way. But are we actually oppressed? Now I think that’s going too far.

Like me, everybody is born an atheist. Some of us return to our roots and find out that you can’t go home again. That’s not oppression: that’s inconvenience. The law is on our side.

That is, until the law is changed. And, with more of us coming out of the closet, with government increasingly in the hands of unelected sectarian officials, do I detect a little pushback? Is public vs. private discrimination becoming a distinction without a difference? We are excluded by “In God we Trust” on our coins and currency, by “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Hmm. Maybe I’m agnostic, after all. This is John Mill.

[*] Austin Cline, http://atheism.about.com/od/attacksonatheism/p/AtheistBigotry.htm. Retrieved 4/18/12.

This Week In Freethought History April 15th – 21st

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , on April 21, 2012 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of a LIVE broadcast by John Mill. John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster. “This Week In Freethought” airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment: 04/21/12)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History: This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

Last Monday, April 16, was the 168th birthday of French writer, critic and Nobel Laureate Anatole France (1844). The writer began as a journalist and married a mentor wealthy enough to get him noticed by 1881. All of France’s novels were unabashedly pagan, in addition to lampooning clerics and Christianity. In the 1920s his writings were put on the Index of Prohibited Books. It was Anatole France who said, “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.” And also (perhaps thinking of religious belief), “If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.”

It was 155 years ago last Wednesday, April 18, that American trial lawyer Clarence Darrow was born (1857). Darrow was 67 years old when he came in direct contact with the conflict between religion and reason in defending Tennessee science teacher John T. Scopes for teaching the theory of evolution rather than fables of gods, snakes and apples. Scopes was convicted, but the world read of and listened (on a scientific novelty called radio) to the famous 1925 “Monkey T rial,” A tireless fighter for the rights of the powerless against the powerful, Darrow once said, “I don’t believe in God because I don’t believe in Mother Goose.”

Coincidentally, or not, it was on April 18, 2008, that the documentary film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed was released in the United States. You can read more about this in my “Reflection” on that film.

Two more anniversaries were marked last Thursday, April 19—

It was on April 19, 1993, that federal government forces with tanks, gas and guns invaded the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. During the 51-day Waco Siege, “Ranch Apocalypse” was burned to the ground and 76 Davidians, twenty of them children, along with their 33-year-old leader, David Koresh, died. The confrontation between the male-dominated, gun-toting government officials and the male-dominated, gun-toting Davidians began on Sunday, February 28. Waco stands today as a massive breach of civil rights and an abuse of government power against a relatively harmless Christian sect. If it can happen to minority Christians, in this nation of churchgoers, are atheists safe?

The Waco Siege inspired Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two years later to the day, to perpetrate the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11, 2001 attacks – the Oklahoma City Bombing (1995).

Last Friday, April 20, brings us two more connected anniversaries—

Last Friday was the 123rd birthday of German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler (1889). While in jail for treason in Germany – he had been plotting to overthrow the Weimar Republic by force – Hitler began dictating Mein Kampf (My Struggle). Hitler’s Catholic upbringing, coupled with a disbelief that a Jew could really be a German (much like George H.W. Bush’s disbelief that an atheist could really be an American), informed his writing. “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,” wrote Hitler. He was clearly no atheist. The only major complaints from Rome regarded Hitler’s interference in Church matters, which were largely silenced by a 1933 Concordat with the Vatican. And Hitler could not have been successful without the support of German Catholics.

It was also last Friday, April 20, 13 years ago, that two students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, brought guns and explosives instead of textbooks to school (1999). The bullied and belittled students had planned their massacre for over a month and timed it for Adolph Hitler’s birthday. Perhaps like Hitler, after their rampage, which left 12 students and a teacher dead, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris took their own lives.

We keep returning to this theme, but it was 56 years ago today that Inherit the Wind, a play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee dramatizing the famous Scopes “Monkey Trial” of the summer of 1925, opened at the National Theatre on Broadway (1955). Inherit the Wind was not about a clash between two 1920s pop stars, Clarence Darrow vs. William Jennings Bryan, or a clash of cultures, intellectual vs. religious. The playwrights are really focused on defending freedom of thought in a time of anti-communist hysteria: The 1950s were a time of cultural anxiety and anti-intellectualism in the U.S., inspired by the crusade of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and his colleagues on the House Un-American Activities Committee. So Drummond (the Darrow character) says to the jury, “Yes there is something holy to me! The power of the individual human mind. An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man’s knowledge is more of a miracle than any sticks turned to snakes, or the parting of waters. … Gentlemen, progress has never been a bargain. You’ve got to pay for it. … Darwin moved us forward to a hilltop, where we could look back and see the way from which we came. But for this view, this insight, this knowledge, we must abandon our faith in the pleasant poetry of Genesis.”

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to my blog, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

Justice Served, But More Children Will Die

Posted in Uncategorized on April 15, 2012 by Al Stefanelli

(This is a transcript of Al Stefanelli’s “Voice Of Reason” segment on my American Heathen® Internet Radio Show)

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who disbelieve, no amount of proof is sufficient.” – Loyola Statement of Faith

Oregon Live reports “a Clackamas County judge stunned a courtroom packed with supporters of Dale and Shannon Hickman Monday when he sentenced the couple, members of an Oregon City faith-healing church, to prison for six years and three months.” The website further reports that the “Hickmans were convicted of second-degree manslaughter in September for failing to seek medical care for their son David, who was born two months prematurely and lived less than nine hours.”

An autopsy revealed staph pneumonia and underdeveloped lungs. According to the story, pediatric experts “testified that the baby almost certainly would have survived if he had been taken to a hospital. The Hickmans sought no medical intervention even as the baby turned gray and struggled to breathe.”

Unjustifiable Homocide…

Oregon had passed a law over ten years ago that stipulates the freedom of religious practice is not an excuse to shun medical treatment for a dangerously ill child. The state legislature did so in response to the deaths of children in the same fellowship, the Followers of Christ Church.  The church cemetery includes many rows of child graves.

An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children who died under the care of faith healers would most likely have survived if they had received medical care. Eighty-one percent of the deaths were caused by conditions that had a medical survival rate of 90%. Many die from the promotion of health by faith.

This has to stop…

The frauds known as faith healers do accomplish something though. They make a lot of money.  Some of these charlatans arrive in private jets and are whisked away to the tent or their hotel in stretch limousines.  Their defense for withholding much needed medical treatment is their interpretation of the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom.  But the right of religious freedom is not absolute and there comes a time when the state must step into the church’s domain.

The job of the government is to protect us from all enemies, foreign and domestic, and these purveyors of false hope are domestic enemies, as they are detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The First Amendment does not give parents the right to use religion to endanger their children’s health.

According to the 1944 case of Prince v. Massachusetts:

“The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death.”

Faith healing does not work…

It kills children. Innocent lives are being lost due to parents who are being duped by these ministers of malevolence all because they have been convinced that seemingly miraculous cures occur. Natural healing processes are being lauded as miraculous cures, while a simple change in emotional state can be responsible.  Divine intervention is not the cause of spontaneous recoveries, which are known to happen to all people, even atheists.  Although science does not completely understand all of these occurrences, they are decreasing and being better understood as time marches on.

The fact that many people believe that these charlatans are divine agents speaks volumes about the level of ignorance, both blind and willful, that still pervades one of the most advanced nations on the planet, in spite of all the advances we have made in the field of medical science in the last century. The rise in preventable child fatalities and the associated suffering as the result of faith healing warrant public concern.

Problems and Solutions…

It’s a problem of monumental proportions that many believers don’t see faith healing as a problem, even in light of the loss of life amongst our children. More states need to enact laws to protect children from medical neglect in the name of healing. The states that already have these laws on the books need to enforce them, and if it means sending government inspectors into our churches and social workers following up on these cases, then so be it.

How would this be paid for, you ask?  How about we remove the tax exempt status for churches? There’d be plenty of money. As well, states that allow religious exemptions from medical neglect should have those exemptions revoked and the practice of faith healing on minors should be made illegal.

Shut Them Down…

Churches that practice this sort of child abuse should be shuttered and the so-called “faith healers” who are using nothing but trickery to raise large sums of money or gain notoriety to feed their bloated egos, should be prosecuted for grand larceny, or worse. Parents who allowing their child to die a slow, painful death are guilty of manslaughter, although probably murder is a better definition.

Parents who believe in faith healing as a cure for their children are suffering from severe mental illness and are unfit parents. They should have their children taken away from them.  They do not deserve the privilege of being parents and should not be allowed anywhere near children.

Divided We Are Falling

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , on April 14, 2012 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 04/14/12)

The headline read “How The Travon Martin Case Has Divided America”.  Really?  A nation divided over a case of murder?  Another news story caught my eye the same day. “Allen West: I’ve ‘Heard’ 80 House Democrats Are Communist Party Members”.  I mentally repeated my last question.  A nation divided over a case of murder?

United we stand, divided we fall.  And, falling we are.  Divided, broken into millions of pieces and parts.  But, it isn’t the murder of Travon Martin that is dividing us.  Nor is it the rantings of a mental midget like Allen West.  Our free-fall is most likely the result of our obsession with our own nauseating self-centered greed,  and total inability to cope with the fact that freedom and liberty belongs to everyone, not just those who agree with us.

Tonight we talked about atheists communicating better.  But, I have to ask, who do we try to communicate with?  Santa Claus?  The Tooth Fairy?  Because, we stand a better chance of convincing these fantasy characters that our humanistic, godless, and intellectually rigorous viewpoint, is valid and worthy of equal consideration, than the millions of narcissistic, egotistical, tyrannical, jesaholics and skydaddy fearing demigods who have taken their ideological puke to new lows.  And, what of the divisions, the falling apart at the seams politiscape that has turned the temperate equator of compromise into the land that time forgot, and then swallowed in a sea of ignorance?

Really.  Who do we communicate with?  Obviously we can’t even communicate with ourselves, with men and women who actually use their brains and dismiss fantasy.  Wait… Dismiss everyone’s fantasy but their own.  The “Us versus Them” divisions we are not immune.  Fantasies, agendas,  run rampant and deep throughout the atheist community.  Entrenched in illogical ideological shit bogs, every single one soon dries into anti-theistic monoliths that slowly yield to compost on the abrasive winds of change. Really?  Who can we even communicate within our own geography?

Divided we are falling. All of us. One by one.  Don’t be misled into thinking we are falling together as a nation.  We are not falling together.  There isn’t a single group of a single mind to be found.  We are all falling, and we are falling  individually and alone.  The cold, hard reality of our self-imposed isolation from the single most unifying tenet of our existence isn’t even apparent to us.  Nope.  For some reason we think being human is so special that we can say,  “Fuck humanity!”  And, we just keep falling.  In fact, most folks don’t notice it, don’t even feel it.  They didn’t notice the sinking feeling in their stomach when they left their perch, they can’t feel the rush of air as they plummet downward, nor do they see the ground fast coming to meet them.  They are oblivious to the sudden stop that awaits them.  It’s inevitable.  Of course, the fall never kills you.  It’s always the sudden stop at the end.  The stop always wins. I’ve stopped worrying about the fall.  Now I’m worried about the sudden stop.  I’m flapping my arms as fast as I can.  I’m reaching for a rip cord that isn’t there.  I’m screaming at the top of my lungs for help.  Nobody’s listening.  I’m hoping it’s just a nightmare.

Case in point…

From the “Allen West: I’ve ‘Heard’ 80 House Democrats Are Communist Party Members” article:  Some members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus confirmed that they are not, in fact, members of the Communist Party.  “I can confirm that Congresswoman Baldwin is not a communist,” said Jerilyn Goodman, spokeswoman for Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), a vice chair of the caucus.

“Chellie is a Democrat, a farmer and a Lutheran but no, she is not a Communist,” said Willy Ritch, spokesman for Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), also a vice chair of the caucus.

Apparently someone thinks being a Lutheran will cushion their sudden stop.  If they even noticed their fall to begin with.  I’ve got news for them and everyone else… It doesn’t fucking matter.  You really should have paid attention before you fell.  Or, how about this… We collectively need to wake the fuck up before this nightmare comes to a sudden stop in reality.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 160 other followers

%d bloggers like this: