Is There A Higher Law Of Physics?

Does nobody get it? The First Amendment clearly, wisely, and generously states that anybody can practice any kind of religion they want, but NO law can be made just because it says so in any establishment of religion’s book of dogma or doctrine, including the Bible, and therefore no religion can be respected in public school as being even hypothetically equal to empirical science or evidentiary history as representing the truth. Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, and the other TV political evangelists blatantly promise to disregard and disobey that First Amendment because they believe they are obeying "A Higher Law" than the mere secular Constitution they would swear to uphold.

In making their case that science is only theories, and therefore no more "true" than any other speculation, and so trying to semantically end-run the Constitution, Creationists have a strange notion of "proof." Science does not begin with the "faith" that you have the answer, then you look for evidence that supports it (and reject that which does not), but the other way round. They are as quick as the OJ jury were to declare that the mathematical possibility somebody else could have the same DNA signature was one in one-hundred-seventy-nine million was good enough for "reasonable doubt" to declare that because the archaeologists found a place called Jericho and the walls have fallen down that means science thus proves every word in the Bible is true.

Creationism does not agree with science, it is the antithesis of science, the denial of evidence, and the abandonment of reason. There ain't nothing much stupider than "faith-based science"... or more dangerous and less democratic than Faith-Based Government. Particularly if you are Christian, or an old-school Republican, be very careful about voting for candidates on the basis of the brand-name they are advertising themselves to represent.

Thank You Jesus, But NO Thank You.

You Sure You Want A Revolution?

The American Revolution was possible because we were an isolated and well-organized colony with vast natural resources, and we didn't have to destroy the terrible taxing Empire, just separate ourselves from it. We also had foreign help that wanted to bring down the government we were revolting against. To what foreign countries today could American freedomists turn for help to bring down Washington? Which of those do you want to see become more powerful than we are?

The French "people's" Revolution resulted in Napoleon. Russian "people's" Revolution resulted in Stalin. Chinese "people's" Revolution resulted in Mao. Spain's failed, and they got Vichy. Germany did it with an internal Uber-Party coup... and got Hitler.

Looks to me like a new US Revolution would likely result in not an affluent Libertarian community, but rule by militant religious fanatics under a real take-charge authoritarian Ordained Leader who would brook no dissent from liberals, perverts, perps, protesters complaining about their rights or rations, or the Godless... no? Tell me, after we have Guillotined Pelosi and torched the Tar Baby on a cross in his front yard, then what? Will we all become Deputies, open a gas station or a Bible school, and buy new cars? And what about Aunt Bea's apple pie? Is that to kill for, or what?

Wikileaks And Anonymous

Can Speaking The Truth Be Blasphemy?

When I see the Wikileaks guy being chased across the planet with the Agents all pointing at his penis, and not a word about the truth of what he revealed, and the Anonymous "1000 Points Of Leak" participants being called cyber-terrorists and traitors, I am reminded of that iconic scene in The Wizard Of Oz. There pulling the levers behind the curtain and putting words into the mouth of the Great and Powerful stands a guy wearing an expensive suit and an Uncle Sam hat. While Dorothy and her trio of stooges stand gaping, he calls for his loyal guards. "This dirty little dog is trying to tarnish the reputation of The Great OZ," he informs them. "Take it out and kill it."

The Anti-Cyclops Papers

An Afghanistan Update

Much as he might like to, The President cannot get us out of the war in Afghanistan, at least not without starting another. You know the scene: the men in black suits take Barack Obama into the underground projection room, and they show him The Film. He turns white (gulp!), and quickly comes to a specuguine conclusion… “I ‘spec you gwine do what you has to… Mr. President.”

Here's a link to read the whole article: Afghanistan Update

The 1st Amendment Means Jesus Too.

From Day 1, 1776, we have violated the 1st Amendment prohibition of laws respecting an establishment of religion in several ways. One of them is freedom from the taxation other establishments must pay, even if doing the same thing, like publishing and broadcasting to generate revenue. A mistake then, worse now, as one extremist religious sect's marketers have created an industry rich enough to play the game of Senators and Presidents, in the hope of waging world war on the unsaved.

Another is the power to issue sex licenses... that is, legal marriage as defined by that establishment of religion's dogma, where all sex without that license is not just sin, but statutory crime.

Also the "blue laws" which regulate business and property use to conform to religious practice, when and what you can buy and sell vs Holy Day schedule, when you can drink, where you can put your business with respect to that church's premises, what books are not in your public libraries, what you can't teach in your schools, etcetc...

The Neo-Conservative Christian American Taliban (NEOCATs) believe their monopoly on the blessing of The One And Only Real God whose image is graven in occult symbols in their ancient scrolls like a mummified idol wrapped in papyrus entitles them to exemption from that Constitutional restriction, as they believe they serve "A Higher Authority" than the mere secular Constitution they would be sworn to defend... ergo, caveat.

Thank You Jesus, But NO Thank You!