Refuting the Irrefutable Proof of God…

Date: December 29, 2015

01) Refuting the Irrefutable Proof of God – part I

“Such bold claims! I took the bait and had to dispute refute and absolutely disprove allegedly indisputable irrefutable absolute proof of God. Mirror this one quickly, kids. This guy likes to control and discussion to keep it one-sided and in his favor.”

02) Refuting the Irrefutable Proof of God – part II

03) Refuting the Irrefutable Proof of God – part III

Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking and Arthur C. Clarke – God, The Universe and Everything Else (1988)…

Date: December 28, 2015

01) Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking and Arthur C. Clarke – God, The Universe and Everything Else (1988)

“Stephen Hawking, Arthur C. Clarke and Carl Sagan (via satellite) discuss the Big Bang theory, God, our existence as well as the possibility of extraterrestrial life.”

Old show…but good stuff.

Rare Level of Perception: Conflation of Ideas…

Date: December 28, 2015

01) 131. Conflation of Ideas

“Published on Dec 27, 2015

Mitch J, Chandler Klebs, and Jamie Soden talk about many different issues and their connection to the belief in free will. They try to clear up the confusion that results when people believe that people are choosing to be obese, choosing to be lazy, or choosing to be sexually attracted to someone. To the extent that we understand no one is freely choosing their thoughts and desires, we feel more empathy and desire to help those with unwanted circumstances rather than blaming and punishing them.”

Very mixed reaction, myself, but some will be interested in this.

For a lot of people who are not MAPs [Minor Attracted People]…what we see here, does represent hopeful progress in cultural thought evolution…They are exploring an issue foreign to themselves, while refraining from typical bile, violence and obscenity, which commonly finds it’s way into these discussions.

That is an objectively good thing…and to be welcomed.

The harder thing to grit your teeth and let pass…is all the stuff that comes up in these conversations…which you know, as a MAP, just really is not warranted…and is something…a stigma…a stereotype…a diminished social categorization, which you’ve been fighting so much of your life to combat and change.

…Being a pedosexual, is not a mental illness.

…This should not be mistaken for the very real issue, that some pedosexuals do go mentally ill, from a lifetime of social abuse and social pressures.

Pedosexuality is a sexual orientation…it is a biological function…It has nothing to do, with ones mental state of health.

Even the DSM 5 attests to this.

Conflating pedosexuality with mental illness, is a cultural thing…it is a cultural construct.

You can be perfectly well balanced, as a pedosexual.

The Fear Of Intergenerational Love…

Date: December 27, 2015

01) The Fear Of Intergenerational Love

“Published on Dec 13, 2015

The fear of love between people of different ages isn’t exactly the same but has been instilled in similar ways as the fear of same-sex people and those of different colors. It also reduces humanity’s compassion and results in cruelty.

You can find more information here:

ISIS Influence on Web Prompts Second Thoughts on First Amendment…

Date: December 27, 2015

01) ISIS Influence on Web Prompts Second Thoughts on First Amendment

“It is one of the most hallowed precepts in modern constitutional law: Freedom of speech may not be curbed unless it poses a “clear and present danger” — an actual, imminent threat, not the mere advocacy of harmful acts or ideas. But in response to the Islamic State’s success in grooming jihadists over the Internet, some legal scholars are asking whether it is time to reconsider that constitutional line.

Appeals for a tougher response to the Islamic State’s online recruiting efforts have, not surprisingly, emerged from the political realm. Donald J. Trump said the government should call on Bill Gates and others to somehow close off dangerous Internet sites, and called First Amendment concerns foolish.

Hillary Clinton said the government should work with host companies to shut jihadist websites and chat rooms. That would be constitutional if voluntary, legal experts say, but not if the government exerted pressure on private firms to cooperate in censorship.

A more forceful case and a legislative proposal were put forth by Eric Posner, a professor of law at the University of Chicago, in an article for Slate. […] The Islamic State’s ability to spread “ideas that lead directly to terrorist attacks,” he said, “calls for new thinking about limits on freedom of speech.”

His proposal would make it illegal to go onto websites that glorify the Islamic State or support its recruitment, or to distribute links to such sites. He would impose graduated penalties, starting with a warning letter, then fines or prison for repeat offenders, to convey that “looking at ISIS-related websites, like looking at websites that display child pornography, is strictly forbidden.

Justice Holmes – “We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.”

Still, it was not until 1969, in the landmark case Brandenburg v. Ohio, overturning the conviction of a Ku Klux Klan member, that the Supreme Court established the current meaning of clear and present danger. It ruled that the government could not punish inflammatory speech unless the speech was likely to incite “imminent lawless action.”

A little documenting, of our further dissent into cultural oblivion.

…After ISIS websites…what is next?

People should not have this power of censorship…period.