Wednesday, September 21, 2016

DC as Cesspool for Evil

I sense no problem with a concept that forms change, i.e., evolve, and that they change consistent with various models of math and space-time geometry.  However, to say that things change consistent with math is NOT to say that no Mathematician is involved in guiding their unfoldment!  A web of math controls unfolding parameters.  It need NOT be conceptualized to control precise "choices" (degrees of freedom) or guidance within such parameters.

Rather, that guidance is from a domain beyond that accessible to the maths of mortals -- in the domain of the spiritually intuitive, faithful, empathetic, appreciative.  Because God functions superior to a field of math, the inferior (the math) can neither prove nor disprove any aspect of the likelihood or unlikelohood of God's involvement.  To posit that scientific evidence can shed light on the "likelihood of God" is a fool's errand.

When God is understood as the spiritual Source of consciousness beyond math, then evolution, so confined, is no threat to a concept of God.   I suspect it tends to be a threat only to those who think evolution must mean that God has "left the building."  Then, they have problems with the idea that living forms change (i.e., evolve). 

But I don't believe that.  I don't conceptualize God as having been the Complete Pre-Determiner, who did His deity work and then "left the building."   Neither do I see the Bible as the scientific exposition of a literalistic God.  Rather, I see it as part of the metaphorically inspiring Word of the Source.  I say metaphorically because I lack hubris to believe I can understand any words that may purport to confine God to a literally complete, consistent, and coherent explanation.  But I CAN personally be inspired by how forms come to dance before my appreciation.

I conceptualize that each of us, as a perspective of Consciousness, is in a personal and fluxing FEEDBACK relationship with the Source of Consciousness.  To my conceptualization, God had no beginning and has no end.  God just is, was, and always has been.   When mortals talk about "in the beginning," they are just talking about the beginning of the bubble in which their present forms of Consciousness happened in common to be guided to unfold.

Being in good will and good faith receptivity to that, I don't "feel" much need to conceptualize further to try to pin God to precise details.  I think it is enough to be receptive and to seek, by good faith and good will, to honor the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule.  I suspect the idea of a final death to consciousness is an illusion.  But as to the details, IF they become knowable after the demise of a perspective, then they then become knowable.  Not before.  To paint literalistic pictures of the "fires of eternal hell" is, to my mind, hubristic.  Deplorably so.  :)

I think Jesus invited each of us to engage in a personal, feedback relationship with the Godhead.  I don't believe Jesus meant to discourage us from trying to appreciate maths that seem to define parameters for how forms unfold.

I agree that atheism and attempts to completely wall away and segregate spiritual values from material values and to banish spiritual faithfulness from the public square is poisonous to every representative republic!  It is poison that greases the way for the people-farming evil of NWO oligarchs and their ignorant shills and spiritually hollow dupes.  It is  poison that helps the most evil to divide us, float to the top, and rule us.  We need to awaken and drive such serpent heads from our republic.  In that light, I agree that DC has become a filthy cesspool of people-farming evil.


I am interested in a way for people who do not feel the same way as literalists to still appreciate the non-forced value of coming together in participatory respect of invitation from the Spirit to reason about the Great Commandment and the Golden Rule, and to consider how such reasoning may apply to secular concerns. 

In part, this is because I think a wall of separation is a chimera.  The gov ought not be forcing the establishment of any particular system of religious customs as a religion.  But it also ought not try to forbid the secular development of certain ideas (such as one man and one woman to a marriage, privileged as such as a matter of secular law) merely because they may also find support within the writings of some religion or other.

But there is no perfect verbal or legal formula for separating that which is in effect forced from that which is in effect voluntary.  This is because we do not have perfect free will.  What we have is participatory will, that  is reconciled within parameters availed in respect of a system.  To separate what is forced from what is voluntary is more in the character of perspective than in the objective of nature.

This necessitates  forums (including churches) to avail participants the dignity of assimilating and reconciling that which they value.  A person's public participation ought not be excluded merely because some fascist wants to label his spirit-based values as being "religious," while labeling the values of a human-secularist-communist (or child abuser) as if they were only "matter based" and therefore permissible for advocacy in the public square.

For example, I don't think it should be advocated in the public square that God wants us to use gov to forbid people from working on Sunday.  I do not say that such cannot be advocated.  Only that, in a free thinking republic, it is overbearing for anyone to presume to speak for God to such an adamant and particular extent, or to try to cut off secular debate by arguing that "God says this particular must be managed so and so." 

It's not the generalized or metaphorical appeal to God that would trouble me.  Rather, what would trouble me would be the appeal based on pretense of being an infallible interpreter or mouthpiece for God in every possible particular that can be rationalized under the Bible.  Generally, free thinking people do NOT want authoritarian or knowitall priests or preachers to presume to be dictators or infallible interpreters of what they want to say is "the plain word of God" for all contexts.

An older child  may tell a younger child to do so and so because Daddy says.  But a competent, free thinking adult will hardly ever accept an argument from another person merely because he says, in his opinion, that the "word of God" says so.  After all, the competent, free thinking adult will have his own opinion about what the "word of God" (and the "biologos of the cosmos") has to say about the subject.  What most Americans want is a republic for human freedom and dignity.  Not a theocracy ruled by any favored theologians of any favored sect.


 Beyond a shadow of a doubt, most International and Republican oligarchs are on Soros' side to consolidate the New World Order. Except for matters of relative insignificance, they view representative republicanism as little more than farce, for which they play dress up with puppets. It was not "the people" that chose the Gorgon, Hillary.


Re:  "If you take away morality and ethics, which are based in religion as revealed in God's law, eventually a form of arbitrarily blind atheism conceived by those drunk with power will lead us into a perpetual darkness."

The above sets out an essential truth, even though it is often a stumbling bloc for atheists.  It is a stumbling bloc for several reasons.  First, what is "revealed" is a way forward, not final answers and "final solutions."  Second, too many people presume all meaningful aspects of reality can be seen, measured, and discerned via tools of science, free of flights of religiously metaphorical fancy.  Too many fail to realize that, at bottom, every model of scientific hypothesis is a metaphor.  What we see and measure are only indirect representations of "reality."  Third, they presume mores based in religion must be as dependent on the abusive authoritarianism of priests as are mores based in the diktat of any hierarchy of aristocrats and autocrats (or oligarchs and "auto-garchs").

But little of that need be true.  It is possible to use religion as a book of metaphors for fostering assimilative reconciliation of mores among free thinking and free discussing congregants.  The book offers a foothold to build on.  Not "the" beginning," but the beginning for each new generation.  Not the final word, but a shared resource for assimilating shared metaphors upon which to build towards a shared language and purpose. 

Unfortunately, most people fail to discern as much.  So they fly off in every direction, less towards moral truths than away from them -- but nearly always as grifters farming dupes, as authoritarians presuming to have final answers, and as sidewinders seeking to profit by sidewinding along (deceiving others and themselves).

Indeed, without spiritual like forums for assimilating common values, a people become lost, to be farmed as cattle by a uniparty of cronies shilling with easily bribed dupes.  And so, it comes to pass that cronies occupy every institution and use them to confound and drive the people to market.  Without churches, gov councils offer only ways to farm the people.  Which is why cronies seek to destroy not every church, but only every church that fosters individual spiritual progress.  They want to destroy not Islam, but Christianity.

The Bible offered, and continues to offer, Americans a foundation upon which to build their society.  Systems for civilized communication require solid foundations.  But for the programming of our very cosmos having been adopted as a transitional reference point among its variously inhabiting perspectives of a unifying Consciousness, not even our cosmos would make any sense -- factually, scientifically, logically, or morally.  The more we jettison our assimilating foundations, the more we shake our faith in facts, science, logic, and morality.  As Obamanites vacuum America to abandon her roots, she abandons herself.  As to the kind of a replacement that will start anew from throwing the baby and the bath water into the vacuum, who can say?  Nevertheless, arsonists like Obama and Hillary will play and presume theyknowbest.  And Prog Cattle will follow.


The goal of international corporatist people farmers is obvious:  To monopolize governments by bribing and duping lofos.  In effect, inhuman corporatists mean to profit by using government to regulate the masses into captive consumers and servile cattle.  This is what the NWO means by "privatizing central government."  This is why government tends to be best when it governs least.

When government is more decentralized, smaller businesses that are closer to the people tend to have better chances.  Their managers tend to be more empathetic, fair minded, energetic, competent, manly, and respectful of the American Ideal. 

When government is more centralized and powerful, its managers tend less to be cream and more to be floaters.  They cannot get promoted without kissing up and dumping dowm (KUSD).  That's why our debate moderators tend almost always to be shills for the central corporatist establishment.  By agglomeration of actions, it is obvious the Establishment is "all in" for opening borders and destroying every independent nation -- to convert the world into one vast people-farming holding company.

To say that central privatization of gov increases efficiency and fairness is an evil big lie.  Do small businesses promote initiative and fairness?  Yes?  Does big business that switches to "gov-regulated service industries" promote initiative and fairness?  NO!  It  promotes abuse, fascism, lies, sloth, hired looters, floating shills, and sub-humanization.  Do we want energetic local business people facilitating real employment, or do we want central moochers and shills faciliating fiat-funded makework that can only end in catastrophe?  Do we want real work, or do we want phony cheap commodities from mass-cheapened slaves?

The reason our republic has fallen prey to oligarchic mooching from and through central gov is because we lacked sufficient moral and formal checks against inhuman international corporate predators.  The way back will be hard.  It must entail a re-assimilation of decent faith and values.  And it must provide practical ways to round up and jail the corporate bad boys.

The biggest and most evil lie in history is that big matriarchal government promotes "charitable" and fair redistribution based either on spiritual merit or on real worth.  Meanwhile, Hillary giggles and shruggles.


Corporatist-socialist fascist government. Run by people farmers (corporatist rinos), by those who like to be farmed (socialist moronic dinos), against all human decency (producing Americans). It's as if God were running a test simulation, to faciliate an eventual victory over evil, under the hope that the faithful will eventually wake up and do the hard stuff that is necessary to put Soros-Ilk back in their cages. As long as Soros-ilk remain free, they intend to cage and farm everyone else. The devil shrugged. 


Oligarchs operate the media to grease the NWO from which they profit. Absent special circumstances, they do not promote talking heads that do not serve them. Our republic cannot survive unless it finds ways to check the oligarchs that have learned how to mooch off governments by buying their politicians. Until we can put SoroIlk in jail, we will be in deathly peril. The surprise would not be to find a corrupt talking head. The surprise would be to find an honest one. "Smart" Libs are too dumb to have yet figured this out.

Is it now hate speech to wear a Trump cap into a Walmart?

The Bush-NWO calculus is that America, the American Ideal, and the ordinary middle-class people that support them are all the walking dead. They think the NWO aspocalypse has been brought to fruition by a successful march through every institution. They think Americans (producing nativists) are defunct.
So the Bushes do NOT represent America or its Constitution. What they represent and worship is the fascist socialism of the NWO. For them, the only good Americans are good cattle. They had best hug close to Obama, Michelle, Hillary, and Soros, because Americans have just about had it with them.


Re: "Obama should take a public stand ...."
It is futile to argue that Obama should take any public stand against evil that seeks to farm people as cattle. Obama-the-puppet-of-the-establishment is unable to take any stand that would counter their evil. He is unable -- in political disposition and practical logistics.
The disposition and logistics that control are those of the choomed out and Self-Godded Establishment. It cares not in the least for the little people, America, or human freedom and dignity. It cares only about its self-goddedness. Everyone who can still think and see can see this plain as day. It's in the Bushes, the Clintons, Soros, and all their associates and fellow travelers.
They rule by controlling "the narrative." Every event is filtered, interpreted, and repackaged to fit the narrative. The reality is that the self-godded establishment is rampantly plundering, raping, and goating everything and everyone that would uphold human freedom and dignity.
Producing hosts are blamed for not giving more blood to establishment predators and parasites. They are called white priivleged or uncle Toms. Police that dedicate their lives to defending against predators and parasites are called pigs. Parasites that loot and maim are called justified. In this way, producers are kept divided, off balance, ruled, and robbed. This is how the predator class of Rinos and the parasite class of Dinos unite to make their living. As to honest work, with good faith and good will towards their fellow human beings -- forgetabout it. They are self-godded.
Why are honest, producing Americans still surprised to find Obama, Hillary, and other Establishmentarians acting like blood suckers and cannibals? That's what these godless, self-godded suckers are! If mainstream producing Americans ever united and found good sense, they wouild Rico and jail, if not hang, the lot of the Establishmentarians and their parasitical shills and stooges.
The Uniparty Establishment turns every decent value into a cuss word. Studying to learn a trade is "acting white." Defending borders and assimilating values is a host of things, none good: racist, chauvenistic, misogynist, phobic, bigoted, bullying, manspreading, nativist, redneck, etc. To advocate against helping predators and parasites to divide, rule, sell off, and hollow out the Republc is "hate speech." It is "intolerant" of the "diversity" that "is our strength and makes us stronger." S/
One might think the masses were being used as cattle, being lulled and prodded to the meat factory. But hey, it's ok, because Obama and Hillary "do it all for the children."
So now, tonight, we will get treated to Hillary lecturing us how she would do wonderful things for the children -- if only Trump would sthu. As Mark Cuban leers. No matter how Trump strikes back at these predators and parasites, they will use their media to brand him as intolerant, phobic, undisciplined, bombastic, uninformed, dangerous, nativist, and against "free trade."
I know alcoholics and dopers that have made themselves beyond fixing because they have fried too many synapses. Reason and logic are foreign to them. But they have one strength that endures: They can twist every event to fit their narrative. A debate based on reason and logic cannot be won against these brain-fried Progs because they have flooded the electorate with half of their kind. No, the debate can only be "won" by showsmanship. Let's hope Trump delivers.

No comments: