I am eternally grateful for the thinkers, dreamers and contrarians of yore that dealt with material deception. Their works and thoughts were the ones that woke me up to the ‘dream state’ of accepting social conformity. Most of them came from the States.

As a solution I can only humbly advocate the monists of the east, centuries old and ever living that present reality as it truly is. That its all just a ride (to borrow Bill Hicks quote). The only thing we need to do, is be (ourselves). Because the first rule of war is ‘know thyself’. That comes before we engage the enemy. Do we really, truly, know the answer to ‘Who am i?’

Know thyself. Know thyself, before one picks up the gun, muttering strange oaths of freedom and retribution. Know thyself. The enemy will dissolve. I promise.

I came across this list the other day on antiwar.com.

It’s true that if Iran does have a weapon that there would be hysteria over it. Saddam was supposed to have them but that didn’t stop us from marching in there.

I would make the point that if they do indeed have a weapon, have had it for awhile, it should prove that there is no cause for panic at all. If they’ve had it then why haven’t they “wiped Israel off the map” yet?

This is also the sort of argument I’ve used against taking any sort of military aggression against Iran. The neocon death cultists tell us that we’ve been at war with Iran for 30 years. My thought is, if we’ve been at war with Iran since 1979, our low number of casualties is simply astonishing.

Churches are trying to sneak by under the same concept as the Jews with their motion light. They are claiming that it would violate their First Amendment freedom of religion for the government to tax the church. If my religion requires me to worship in the privacy of my own home, should that exempt me from property taxes? They are trying to turn a property tax issue into a religious issue and demand that we discriminate in their favor because they choose to subscribe to a religion that restricts them to worshiping inside a certain building.

I also think it’s silly to have “In God We Trust” on the money. I’ve been put off the last few years by that sort of stuff. It’s like saying God is either a Republican or Democrat. Of course every country thinks God (or whatever deity they have) is on their side, if for no other reason than to justify their atrocities and sucker people of good faith.

But I am still in favor of tax exemption for churches only as long as they are just places of worship. If they become organs for either of the major parties, then they should be taxed, be it a Jerry Falwell-type church or Obama’s old church.

In short, a hands off approach by the government is what I favor because the less the government has a hand in churches, the more freedom people will have to practice their faith, or lackthereof.

‘Tolerating’ beliefs and ‘preventing worship’ are essentially meaningless though, since if government makes any concessions to them it is guilty of discrimination. People should simply be treated by government as if religion doesn’t exist. Do you take exception to that concept? I know you aren’t among the ranks of the faithless. It would mean no more God on the money, no more tax free churches, and hate crimes would just be regular crimes,

‘Someone else’s property’ also gets interesting, since by that reasoning it might be ok for your local store to simply say that there are no Muslims allowed. Going to absolutes in either direction has lead to some of the more horrible mistakes of history, while finding a grey area in the middle leads to endless litigation wherever the front lines currently lie. I would tend to move towards a hands off approach by government and just hope that society is now sufficiently enlightened to ostracize those who won’t play fair.