Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Progressive White Men


The allegiances of minorities and gays and eco-ideologues and women were bought and paid for - I can bend my mind around why they remain loyal to Democrats. I do not agree with their allegiancesm as I know most were taught a different moral standard, but I can comprehend their motivations.

White Progressive/Liberals are a separate matter entirely. White male Progressives are truly despicable. These people choose and encapsulate the worst of human behaviors: greed, envy, jealousy and the big one Hate. They hate everyone with more material wealth than they. They are self-absorbed on a scale seldom seen among humanity. These men are willing to betray their kinsmen. They voluntarily suffer a second class status (that they help create and expand) They endure the racial and sexual jabs for the ordinary salary they are paid. Through political vote, or the conditions of their employment, they perpetuate and expand policies that harm their own sex, family members, friends, professional associates... to preserve their government job and retirement package. These are petty and small minded people.  White Progressives view the world through a scale of material possessions. Life is zero sum. If one has, another has less. If another profits more than they, it was gotten illegitimately. If another surpasses them professionally, it's because of sexual or personal preferences beyond their control, and per their assertions - beneath their moral standards. These people are spoiled brats, grown older. Too timid to risk in the private sector; lacking the intellect required to gain recognition and confidence, they choose the guaranteed, another one of too many, employed in make work offices specifically created to enlarge government and the number of votes pursuing that end.

The WPM is a group of once responsible white men who now sit and watch the country slide into financial ruin - but refuse to part with the stipend they receive. They face a moral crisis - what they were taught about stealing and receiving something not earned. But the Progressive machine provides an answer - Caring.


If the White Progressive agrees to care - he is granted absolution. Caring forgives every sin. Coveting, sloth, greed, and the many forms of prevarication Progressives must spout whenever they attempt to justify their actions or the actions of their employer/provider - government, and the hatred that drives the others sins are swept away. Care about a Progressive cause and all is forgiven. The Progressive needn't actual contribute financially, or give of their time performing the actual work required to administer a program - caring will suffice. This is why the statistics consistently reveal Conservatives contribute more money and time to help the needy than Progressive Liberals. Voting for Progressives is another means to forgiveness. Voting for a candidate who promises to act against every moral statute a person was taught to hold dear - is another way to prove loyalty to the party. And, if a white Progressive is paid a handsome salary, they are expected to return a portion of that salary to the party, or pressure their friends and associates - "bundling" campaign contributions using promises of access and/or intimidation stating the bad things that may happen if a contribution is not forthcoming, is another way to avoid paying themselves and remaining in the party's good graces.

White Progressive hate is all encompassing. They also hate the other groups under the Democrat Big Tent. If those other groups didn't exist, they could get so much more. And, there are other reasons why white Progressives dislike their political associates. In truth, they are little different than their white Conservative brethren in many important ways. The lies spoken to retain employment, and self-promote their personal Progressive agenda - their caring, are mostly falsehoods. They do not befriend minorities or work to find ways to live among other races, or groups with different sexual practices. They retire each night to the safe, subdivision or complex where they live - populated nearly exclusively by white Christians, and find reasons to hate their neighbors who own more than they. Their neighbors find the means to avoid selling their souls for pay check - another reason to hate them. The typical white Progressive lives on the brink. They over-consume housing to avoid living next to "Them" - others who are physically and sexually different than themselves. This taps their income to the breaking point. But, the alternative is unthinkable. That alternative is so objectionable white Progressives will risk financial ruin, and live a sub-standard life, to avoid it. This makes the white Progressive angry. They never consider the Party isn't doing enough for them. The successful people who pay taxes and assume personal responsibility and the risks are the focus of their anger.

Listen to the tone. Listen to the topics spoken by white Progressive Liberals and one can hear the venom/hate. Disagree with them on any topic and the rage will begin to grow. Find another point of disagreement and the volume increases and they begin to hint at negative stereotypes. Point out a third disagreement and the white liberal loses control. The personal attacks begin in earnest. You are accused, and called names, lumped in with the worst of humanity. You are labeled a hater (???!), intolerant, and stupid. Stupid is the most hilarious aspect of white liberalism.

White liberals fancy themselves more intelligent than any Conservative. In truth, it is their only, and last, self ordained personal asset. The Progressive Party sells this garbage to the membership - if you belong and agree with us you are smart - to not belong or agree with us is stupid. Thinking different than us is stupid. It’s an all or nothing conclusion and every one of those is, well, stupid. A categorical analysis of the Democrat party reveals a membership that is comprised primarily of stupid people who cannot negotiate life without the party or government assistance. Every member has their hand out. They were driven to the Progressive party because they failed at life. Now how smart is that? There are many other reasons why the majority of Progressives are stupid, but those can be found elsewhere in this blog.

White Progressive love to label people who disagree with them, or offer evidence of the failure of Progressive policies and programs - Nazis... KKK Klansmen... Racists. Like every other word out of a Progressive's mouth, these are acts of "Projection". Projection is a psychological term used to define a person who blames and accuses others of possessing the negative traits that most accurately defines the person blaming and making the accusations. What the white Progressive accuses is what they are most guilty of themselves. Progressives adore NAZI-ism. Nazi-ism was a form of government where the state owned/partnered with businesses. This political ideology includes the government controlling the means of production. Enemies of the state had their businesses confiscated. Friends of the State were treated well, so long as they acquiesced to wishes of the State. This form of politics is termed Fascism. Fascist is another favorite label white Progressives like to apply upon their political adversaries. Again - Projection. Fascism is their desired form of government/business - particularly the punishing the enemies aspect. White Progressive love seeing anyone better off than themselves punished and hurt - financially... and truth be told - physically. As stated above - their hatred is all consuming.

Doubt what is written here? Challenge a white Progressive to a political discussion. You will eventually hit the hot button and what is written above will unfold before your eyes.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Progressive's Fealty to Evolution and the Required Leaps of Faith


Faith is requisite to embrace evolution. Faith is a word bound tightly to religion's ethos, and, as such, should prompt evolution's adherents to intuitively strike any act(s), or mention of faith from evolution's core principles. Evolution should be able to stand on the three legs of every theory's supporting stool: factual evidence, logical integrity, and reason bound assertions analogous with, and tempered by, the Scientific Method.  Any support that betrays / fails the theory's primary assertions invalidates the theory. Evolution fails marvelously in all three areas. Having faith in evolution is more than a reflexive emotional response that every scientist seeking credibility must control.  Eliminating faith based requirements from any credible theory is as essential as hydrogen is to water - one of the primary molecules required for life.

Pope John Paul commissioned a book on the topics of Science, Theology and Philosophy. It is a wonderful read.  The book is philosophically and emotionally neutral and fixated upon the requirements of the scientific method.  However, a fundamental scientific allegiance must recognize the gaping chasms contained in evolution’s several theories and evolution's essential “enabler”: The Big Bang.

If one embraces evolution and the central precept - there are no controlling authority(s) in our universe.  Then there must be a moment where the universe came into being - sans any sentient external impetus - (Gods or the current vogue idiom “Intelligent Design”).  So eager and committed are evolution’s adherents to mock and murder God or ID they strap on 7-League Footwear and confidently march past the point of the universe’s essential question – what is / was the uncaused first cause?  From Where, What, or Whom may we attribute the first matter used to produce the Big Bang and its several environmental associates – space and time being two.  This is a quantum leap of faith that ignores the very same requirements evolution adherents demand from any scientist, or evidence used in supporting God or ID.   Every first year science student is taught the foundation of theory requires validating the core components of the theory.  “Approved” former and accepted facts in evidence may be used, but if that tactic is applied, it threatens the former work of others.  Should the new theory fail, it will cast an indubitable shadow upon the theories adopted for the new theory's premise. It is practice frought with dangers to credibility and associated theories. This practice is Strang Verbotten for God or ID, but heartily supported for evolution – a curious double standard that violates other scientific standards. 

SO... where DID all that Big Bang matter originate?  What produce the uncaused first cause.  All the matter in our universe had to first be “created” or exist and be put in motion to effect the singularity – infinite gravity holding infinite matter.  For now, let us ignore science has yet to identify what causes gravity, and ignore evolution's unwillingness to address the uncaused first cause, and address the first problem.  Hydrogen molecules must form from the singularity of matter.  That hydrogen occupies the first position on the table of elements does not assure one of the pieces of matter that exited the Bang was hydrogen. 

The next problem is one with a probability so low it defies billions of years – the Big Bangers inform us the age of the universe is less than 15 billion years.  Random elements transforming into a living organism is an enormous problem.  Using the term enormous does not accurate define the scope problem.  I doubt a word exists that will accurate define this problem.  SCIENCE concludes for life to originate happenstance it requires an 40,000 exponential applied to the number 10 to accurately factor random events that MAY lead to matter becoming alive.  Fitting that 40,000 exponential into this document requires over 12 pages just to hold the places for the zeros in the exponential in this document’s format.  Further complicating matters is the happenstance and time required to create suns, planets, indeed the universe itself.  The placement of suns and planets required to foster life also requires water/H20 per our knowledge and conjecture.  Energy must, by happenstance, be introduced in the exact amounts and properly placed to enliven the elements used.  The proper mixtures required to spontaneously ignite life must be present in the exact location and proper quantities.  Matter must specifically be prepared and able to receive the energy dispersed.  In addition, a plethora of other factors - specific: times, distances, quantities, and the several random events required, must be produced for the opportunity of life to erupt. 


Other problems with evolution include the central premise for evolution's causality - environmental pressures and niches.  Ostensibly, according to Darwin's postulates, environmental pressures presuppose, drive, and support mutations that ostensibly dooms the ubiquitous specie that produced the mutation. These environmental pressures defy logic and the accepted evidence available. 

Take for example the amoeba...  the amoeba still exists.  So do many other other single cell creatures.  What prompted them to confederate to form a more complex organism?  If envornmental pressures were causal, then how did the amoeba survive?  Apply this to any species.  For Darwin's postulate to hold integrity - in theory - as species mutate due to environmental pressures, the organism that bred the mutation should die out.  Happenstance has no little value in the scientific method.  

Mutations are most often a happenstance, random event and the mutation is an impefect copy of the pair producing the mutation.  Mutations are typically a flawed example of the specie creating it.  Most are so flawed they do not live long enough to reproduce.  Being flawed, the organizsm further lacks the ability to attract a mate - in more advanced species.  

Let's examine this doozy of a problem.  Fish...  Fish that breathe oxygen with lungs.  Fish whose gills are replaced by or coexist with lungs.  We still have an abundance of fish species.  Some are said to be hundreds of millions of years old.  Some breathe oxygen with lungs.  They remain fish.  Few fish designs have died out.  The fossil records proves this. Fish remain fish-like in design. The KT boundary, the asteroid impact that killed all the dinosaurs, appears to have had zippy impact upon fish - ditto  many other land animals. (How was it only the dinosaurs were killed by the KY impact?  How could other species survive?  How did crocodiles, a member of the dinosaur group survive?)

More to the point, what prompted a mutated fish to leave the comfort of the waters to seek an unknown new life on land (and vice-versa)?  Making matters more improbable is the need for a breeding pair of the mutations, capable of breeding, that share a dislike of the waters, possess lungs, and the pair act to leave that environment together; at, or near, the same time and physical location.  They must then to find a sexual attraction for breeding purpose. AND... this breeding pair must instinctually know; even when they have no experience in the new environment, what food types exist on the land, where to find that food, to sustain life.  If the pair fed upon certain plants poisonous to them, they die.  If the pair are unable to locate and ingest ample food to sustain them, they die.  They must find shelter from the elements on land that do not impact life in the waters as severely, or die out.  The mutation will not possess legs, arms or opposable thumbs - requisite for optimal life on land. The mutation will have mutated fins. The mutated organism must be able to move about to find food and shelter.  Walking on mutated fins and breathing with mutated lungs drives the probability of survial downwards.  The breeding pair must sustain themselves long enough to create offspring.  The offsprings must further adapt/mutate to improve life on land - all by happenstance!  Mutations are not typical and do not occur regularly.  The term mutation suggests irregularity and unorthodox morphology.  

An important aside - Mutations are not typically the most vibrant examples of the species that produces the mutation.  Most often, the mutation is a weak, malformed specimen, ordinarily possessing physical and mental traits incompatible with their evironment or a long life.  Those weaknesses lead to the organism's early demise. Human mutations include: Downs Syndrom, malformed limbs and organs, congenital morphological dysfunctionality, and other traits that limit the offspring's ability to survive in the environment where it is born - even when artificially cared for and their defects synthetically ameliorated.  Presuming mutations are vibrant and vigorous examples of the species that produces them has few, if any examples, in the species/specimens we know to exist and study.  The malformed, weak mutation is the norm. 

More on fish...
Presupposing the breeding pair of fish managed to negotiate the troubles facing them on land, and overcame the inordinate problems in that pursuit.  Hypothetically - accept the pair adapted to exist upon the land.  When Darwin's "pressured" causality is next applied - inexplicably these mutated fish were again pressured by the environment to return to the environment where life were so difficult the fish had no option but to leave those waters in the first causality!  Reverse all the above water to land adaptation problems, and overlay a land animal returing to the waters.  The probability problems get worse. What environmental problems were so consequential they pressured a breeding pair of land animals forced to return to the sea?   The earth remains populated with an abundance of land animals.  What was so bad it prompted land animals to return to the waters?  The environmental or another external pressure reasoning is more than specious.  This "reasoning" is dubious, defies logic and evidence, ignores copious data, and cast a dark shadow over Darwin's motivations in developing his "Theory". 

Was it what Darwin found in his travels that prompted his theory? Or, did Darwin have a specific theory/outcome he wanted and worked to substantiate that outcome?  The latter seems the more probable motivation because Darwin's reasoning for evolution's causality is severely flawed and requires faith to remain an accepted theory. Darwin's searching for hand picked evidence that supported his conjecture does not follow one of science's basic premises.  Truth is, Darwin inverted the scientific process. 

Life in the Gallopagos is uniquely adapted to that environment.  But that adapted life does not comport universally; as Darwin's pressure theory collapse quickly once one investigates further, or considers why the original organism that produced the mutated offspring still exists, or the necessary requirements for adaptation into a new environment are fully entertained.

Niches do not necessarily need filling. Unless the person examining the niche chooses, for unscientific reasons like personal gain, to fill them, they will remain unfilled and life around the niche will not suffer accordingly.  

Does evolution exist? Yes - within specific species and environments.  Darwin's Finches are a good example.  The Finch changed - adapted to its environment.  However, the Finch remains a Finch and belongs to a groups of animals called birds.  Why did the original Finch remain?  What possible reason/pressured causality explains why a supposedly superior Finch mutated due to pressures, but the original, supposedly inferior Finch responsible for the special evolution, persists - thriving?  

There are thousands of bird species.  Could an "Adam and Eve" breeding bird pair be responsible for all the bird species?  Perhaps, improbable, but possible.  Evolution derails at several junctures.  Evolution derails when a specie morphs into a new specie.  It derails when the original single celled animal chooses to confederate. It derails when matter assumes life by happenstance.  There are example heaped upon example of why specieal evolution is improbable  - and impossible. 

Modern science has specific reasons for wanting evolution adopted as the basis of their several conjectures.  The reasons are codified in human behaviors and human ambitions - not scientific evidence or the scientific methods. In this practice, they share Darwin's professional behaviors and ambitions, and those behaviors are purposeful.

Most likely, Darwin had a predetermined outcome and went looking for evidence to support it.  Darwin only used the evidence that advanced his theory.  Darwin chose to ignore evidence surrounding him - evidence that other scientists knew and suggested invalidated Darwin's "sans sentient causality" and any associated theory.  Darwin was no different than any other man.  His nobility is neither enhanced or sullied by his choices.  Like most of Darwin's examples, he faced environmental pressures - the pressures of living.  Darwin needed all the requisites of life - food and shelter.  But man has additional needs to survive - his large brain and intellect drives man to make other choices - some antithetical to his optimal life.  Darwin wanted fame as a scientist.  Darwin not only studied animals and their behaviors, he studied man.  Darwin knew the richest and most powerful people in his day were the aristocracy.  The aristocracy had trouble keeping God's commandments.  If Darwin could murder God - PROVE no God existed, he would gain fame and profit handsomely.  

Evolution renders God dead.  God never existed - per evolution's conclusions.  If there is no God, Science assume the mantel of God as the respository, and giver, of all knowledge.  Science then structures morality and directs human behaviors to their benefit(s).  In Darwin's time and before, the aristocracy of Europe, and others, wanted God officially, scientifically, dead - to better enable their lacivious desires and behaviors - freed from moral restraint.  The modern Left, Progressives, desire the same God-less universe for the same reasons.  They want no controlling authority over their behaviors, AND...  they want to be GOD! 

I cannot, will not, believe the Stromatilites in Shark's Bay are my ancestors.  Specieal change requires purposeful sentient intervention.  Dynamic designs must exist.  Trial and error will complicate the results and the contort the processes used to accomplish these changes.  

Organized religion complicates evolution and provides fodder for scientists and those with a limited intellect who are easily confused and led.  The majority of organized religions refuse to confront the Bible and believe absolute faith is a commandment.  So is "Ponder the Scriptures" - but that is a forgotten commandment.  Idiotically, refusing to address the gapping chasms in man's creation and Man's time on earth (which is a calculation based upon suppositions of factors found in the Bible) gives science enough evidence to make religion look foolish and incompetent.  Since science is driven by self serving ambitions, mocking religion provides them entertainment and command of the facts.  Religion appears rigid and unwilling to confront the several shortcomings in their Biblical interpretations.  

Man's creation - including all the details and failures to so do - may not be thoroughly articulated in the Bible - oh well.  The previous post on the Book of Enoch provides evidence of this causality and the sources of the causality.  The Gods - plural - were responsible for the intervention required for specieal change and other changes upon the face of this earth.  There were specific reasons for the God(s) actions. The time referrence for these Gods is not known - exactly.  The time space continuum, the inherent questions/inconsistencies that remain unresolved in Quantum mechanics, dimensions, and many, many, other factors all weigh upon God's time - i.e. what is the exact relationship between God's day and man's day/month/year,decade; et al?  

Who and what are the Gods of the Bible?  Could they be extra-terrestrials with little religious connotation past ordering man to keep a record of his activities, and, provide man essential rules of behaviors - to hopefully delay the time until mankind self annihilates?  

I can trust an unseen God more than man/science's suppositions and conjectures that were specifically crafted to enable the worst of human behaviors and transfer authority.  God's plan for life upon the earth and the information / commandments shared with man improved mankind.  Admittedly, man has not always used God's gifts well or for good purposes.  That is a man problem - not a God problem.  Conversely, mankind has worked miracles of goodness using God's commandments.  

The opposite is true after man assumed Darwin's Theory / God's mantel.  We will continue to suffer and witness society collapse until manking reverts to believing in Gods. 



Friday, August 2, 2013

God(s), Enoch, Love and the Law of Conservation


The Book of Enoch Scripture is a marvelous work that bridges the gap between the temporal and spiritual realms. Enoch details his journey with the Gods (plural) and their emissaries - Angels. He additionally describes God's home, God's work, power, and objectives - short and long term.

Enoch, like any man's reports and revelations are illustrated within the context of his frame of reference, or by direct order from God. Enoch was the great-grandson of Adam. Technology was in its infancy. Only the technologies provided man by The Watchers were known by Enoch. (The Watchers were wayward Angels that fell in love with human women, had sex with them, and produced Giant sized offspring.) The Watchers also taught ("Discovered to man".) technologies: metallurgy, alphabet, writing, medicine, sorcery, and likely other technologies that went unrecorded. The Watchers broke their promises and disrupted God's plans. This provides an interesting dichotomy - did God contingency plan for the Watchers' actions - as he did with the Tree of Knowledge? Or, was God caught flat footed? The scriptures provide no details.

Enoch tried to describe what he saw while visiting God's realm, but his unfamiliarity with technology prevented him from detailing his journey and what he was privy to see in a meaningful and more useful way. Even though Enoch had a limited frame of reference, much can be extrapolated from his words. This extrapolation is inexact and far from sure, but modern technologies can be overlaid upon Enoch's words, and the circumstances Enoch provided. This practice provides interesting alternatives, and, in some cases, expands the extrapolation. By inserting a field of science or technology into Enoch's descriptions and applying the knowns, unique interpretations arise. The use of trial and error is painstaking but it does provide several paths to comprehend Enoch's words and better know God, and what he expects and demands from us.

Know that I love our God and in no way wish to be irreverent or heretical, though some will take I am. God commanded we "Ponder" the scriptures. That is my purpose.

Repeatedly, throughout his works, Enoch praises God and tells of others praising God. Given Enoch's favor by God, we can conclude God appreciates man praising him. This conveys the man offering praise agrees with God and obeys God - so much so he verbally resounds his agreement. This act is more than a rite - it contains physical phenomena. The voice sends atoms into motion. Within that vocalization are specific resignations and volumes. How these interact within the earth's environment and the dimensions therein, are unknown. God requirements from man include man interacting within the environment in specific ways and for specific purposes - religious rites and rituals. God's design of man's environment should include the means to optimize these interactions, to better enable man's efforts to reach God for the purposes intended. I suspect they do, but man remains yet unable to appreciate the physical interactions occurring.

Another interesting factoid is found in a related matter. Within Mormon scriptures there is a reference to an interpretation made by Joseph Smith when he was provided sarcophagi from Egypt. These works were decorated with images and "lettering". Joe used the Urim and Thummin for that work. One image in particular contain prophesies and an example of God's sense of humor.

God entices man with one image. 

Facsimile 2 from the Pearl of Great Price - 
Item 11: Also (Ought not be revealed at this time.) "If the world can find out these numbers, so let it be. Amen." 

Here, I see God's sense of humor. It makes me laugh - and want to discover what the numbers mean.

ITEM 5: Contains a wonderful revelation that solidifies my beliefs and reinforces my conclusions respecting electrons/photons and their purpose in this universe: These forms of matter are the primary device used to exchange information.

(The image) Is called in Egyptian Enish-go-on-dosh; this is one of the governing planets also, and is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, borrows its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power, which governs fifteen other fixed planets or stars, as also Floeese or the Moon, the Earth and the Sun in their annual revolutions. This planet receives its power through the medium of Kli-flos-is-es, or Hah-ko-kau-beam, the stars represented by numbers 22 and 23, receiving light from the revolutions of Kolob.

My Opinion:

(Kolob is God's home planet/abode according to Mormon scripture.)

Kae-e-vanrash is the greatest power within our universe and all life flows from, and is sustain by, it.

Our Sun is powered by a transfer of photons/electrons from Enish-go-on-dosh. The sun provides energy to all life forms on the earth. Man's spirit is comprised of a confederation of electrons - information interpreted by our physical senses and acquired during our lifetimes. Our brains collect these data and use them to create thoughts and ideas. This mass of electrons accrues/enlarges over our lifetimes and enhance, or, degrade our spirits. Man cannot exist without the photos/light from our sun. Plant life would perish and the lower life forms would die out; life that predates on those life forms then dies; all the way up the food chain to man. 


All the energy on earth is transferred to earth by the sun through the Enish-go-on-dosh. Enishgo-on-dosh receives its energy from a process/medium named: Kae-e-vanrash. Kae-e-vanrash is the Grand Key that additionally sends electrons to at least 15 other stars (suns) and/or planets that reflect light (photons). Kae-e-vanrash powers those suns by an unknown process that sends energy (electrons) to those suns and to other targets.

All the electrons within our universe are suspected to sum to a finite quantity. Earthly Physics Law suggests matter cannot be created or destroyed.  However, the dynamics of a black hole corrupt that "Law". Light (photons) entering the black hole disappears - exits the universe. That energy is then lost - breaking the Law of Conservation used by physics.) Where that light goes is unknown.

One physicist - Lenny Sussman - theorizes that matter wraps around the inner barrel of the black hole - thus preserving the information/energy. Steve Hawkins initially theorized another option - the energy was lost. That theory prompted Sussman's.

My Theory: Our universe is not completely known - its size, design, and the matter within it and not known, and we humans are incapable of knowing the totality of information contained within the universe. I assert undiscovered dimensions in our universe are where the energy collected by black holes is deposited - thus "theoretically” preserving the energy.

(ASIDE: The Higg's Boson - once substantiated - will mathematically "prove" these dimensions exist. Dark Matter appears related to and therefore key to identifying those dimensions.)

The design and inter- play between the other dimension, our universe, and potentially other universes that black holes provide access to and from; are complicated, vast, and orderly. The physics and known laws governing all of this space and matter are God's domain. God must live and act within the laws he established to operate the universe, OR, our God, in conjunction with other Gods, who, like him, are subordinate to a higher "Universal" God - the Great I Am. All these Gods operate their domains inhibited by the design, physics, and laws given them to control the domain.

The Book of Enoch and other Coptic scriptures refer to the first God - the uncaused first cause - the Great I Am. This being created all our sense comprehend and more. He has a wife. Together, they created all that our senses are capable of knowing - including our God and the other Gods who reside within the universe we detect / know.

God our Father, and Christ's Father, the God of the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, and other scriptures is the ruler to whom we pray and the author of the Commandments with the scriptures we follow. I pray to not offend him, as I love him with every bit of matter within me. As my Dad, he encouraged me and everyone else to ponder the scriptures. That is what led to the development of my theories. Right or wrong, my theories are a genuine effort to gain more knowledge and information. What we learn while on this earth (Our intellect) is the only thing we are permitted to keep after this life on this earth ends. Our intellect may provide us an advantage in the life that follows. God is cool with that and so said:

Doctrine and Covenants; Section 130:

18 Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.

19 And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

...This section also contains my favorite scripture and reveals our Dad's love for us. He provides a path to receiving blessings -

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.


This scripture provides me peace and motivates me to learn perpetually.  

Thursday, August 1, 2013

The PATRIOT: Edward Snowden - Thank You

A wise man once said:  "a man who will exchange liberties for a temporary safety (comfort) deserves neither liberty or safety/comfort."  That was Ben Franklin - a White Male Founder of this nation.  He was not alone in this thinking; as many of the Founders wrote similar thoughts.  The Bill of Rights are "God Given" liberties that neither man nor government were empowered to alter or remove.  The Founder's intent was to permanently protect the rights and liberties endowed by God using a Constitution whose language prohibited the government from acting to lessen or eliminate the rights and liberties, permanently ordained upon man/citizen. 

The liberty metaphor I offer is: Freedom is a tightrope walk without a safety net.  Freedom is innately shrouded with risks and threats.  The preservation of freedom requires a people who comprehend the risk of liberty and who are adequately prepared to defend their freedoms.  Man must be eternally vigilant in preserving his freedoms.  The weak, timid, and fearful cannot, will not, defend themselves - or their freedoms.  The frail are irresolute respecting liberty.  They fear the risks freedom contains.  The feeble and weak seek protection from a source who asks the least for providing the protection.  Women being smaller in stature and genetically inferior in strength to a man - traditionally seek a husband for self protection and for their offspring.  The genetic bond a man shares with the offspring produced between the pair typically prompts the man to protect the woman and offspring; instinctively   Democrats have pursued policies to transfer/eliminate liberties to the federal and state governments.  A single husband is unable to compete with the resources a government enjoys and controls.  Once government decides to rob the freedoms of its citizens, it can and it will.  Democrats/Government(s) seeking the political authority to steal Constitutionally protected liberties so do through the voting process.  Democrats have been able to enact policies that weaken and eliminate liberties due primarily to votes they receive from women.  Women are the majority of the electorate and their votes predicate election outcomes.  Women seeking protection from acts of terror - a repeat of the 9/11/2001 attack - voluntarily enabled Democrats to enact policies that spy upon citizens - through actions Democrats claim are structured to protect the citizenry.

One employee, Edward Snowden, was employed in an agency of the federal government.  Through his employ, he witnessed actions within the agency that defied the US Constitution's protections for personal property - the 4th amendment.  Mr. Snowden acted to inform the US citizens of the threat posed to their rights and liberties.  Snowden broke an oath he took for agency security purposes.  Snowden saw one of his his oaths and actions within the agency as incongruent.  He could not act to protect and preserve the duty the Constitution imposes upon every citizen AND deny the actions within the agency that trample over the rights and liberties guaranteed in the Constitution.

Mr. Snowden is a patriot.  Snowden's respect and dedication to the preservation of the freedoms and liberties articulated in the US Constitution prompted him to forswear his security oath made to the US government agency and embrace the responsibilities and loyalty he was ordained by virtue of his birth as a US citizen.  Snowden broke a rule specifically to assure the the liberties and freedoms guaranteed in the US Constitution - which the employment oath was ostensibly created to preserve

Snowden will live the remainder of his life hiding in a God-forsaken corner of the globe - if he isn't murdered for his actions. A drone strike will likely end his life if Obama/Democrats/Agency officials locate him. Snowden informed the world what the US government was doing with their snooping equipment.  This is equipment that US citizens presumed (because they were told by legislators) is used to look for potential terrorist before they struck. Apparently, considering the number of terror attacks that have escaped detection; spying on the American people and the political enemies of Democrats has assumed a predominant role within the agency that employed Snowden. Amazingly, BOTH political parties voted to permit, and continue to defend, a government that snoops and confiscates the personal property of its citizens. 

The President and government's official farcical response is they actively snoop into the personal property to make Americans safe. These are the same folks who abandoned a US Ambassador and Navy Seals in Libya when threatened. They died. So will Snowden. Our government does not want us knowing what they are up to, and the information they now hold and control.

The recent IRS scandal where employees and Obama's political appointees (operatives)  should make everyone's blood run cold. If a President and/or government chooses to use a government agency that now controls a citizen's personal property, to attack the citizen based upon political preferences, to what lengths will they go to eliminate political opposition? There are no limits and no laws Democrats and government employees will not break to maintain their offices and authority in Washington, D.C.. Democrats in government are keeping copies of everyone's emails, internet searches, social media (contacts and activity) every phone call - all this information and more is captured and stored for some future date when the enemies of the State will be identified and prosecuted from crimes not yet enacted into law - or perhaps they are enacted - in tiny paragraphs written into obscure places like the farm subsidy bill.

Women are primarily responsible for allowing this activity that breaks Constitutional protections and offends liberties. Once women gained the vote - comfort and safety became the primary concerns for the majority of citizens (women) when voting.  This female behavior is instinctual and largely immutable.  It is influenced by concern for their offspring.  Even rational women who weigh political debates eventually insert the security factor into their rationale, and the security risks drive their votes.  When Democrats introduced and codified birth control and abortion fears, the female vote became axiomatic for the majority of women.  When the Founders chose to deny women the voting franchise, they did so after considering the implications realistically - and from experience.

The Founders were not sexist men but they knew the behaviors of women and denied women the vote because of their preferences of safety and comfort - RE: Protection.  Women number over half the population of voters.  Together with weak, timid, conniving men, they can assemble a majority of voters.  Democrats require a person deny the information their senses deliver to them.  Democrat voters suspend reality and focus upon imaginary forces, risks, and threats rather than upon what their senses reveal are the problems in their lives.

As the Democrat Party increasingly stole the liberties of white men, and set upon a path of denigrating white men and isolating their political powers, they sought to lure women to consider government as their surrogate spouses/providers.  Abortion and birth control were the mechanisms used.  Democrats were successful and have stolen significant freedoms accordingly.  Democrats are presently empowered to steal a considerable number of liberties and perhaps permanently rest control of government.  A majority of women apparently value safety and comfort over liberty and freedom - or they they are too feckless to know how their votes works to end their liberties.  It is no wonder why Democrats frantically advanced a preposterous Republican "War on Women" assertion during the past election.  The War on Women tactic is used by Democrats in every election, and with every sanctioned political groups Democrats claim to represent - and PROTECT!  Risk, threats and Fear are the operative dynamics.  Democrats have articulated threats for each sanctioned group - racism, sexism, homophobia, et al.  Sound an alarm!  Define the threat.  Encourage and enable the group's fanatical response.  Provide a solution (end to the threat) VOTE Democrat! 

This factual observation, with ample evidence supporting the observation, does not positively reflect upon women and their priorities.  It further enforces the Founding Father's conclusions that women should not hold the voting franchise because women are instinctively predisposed to seek security for themselves and their offspring.  Instinctual predisposition renders women incapable or unwilling to choose liberty and the parasitical risks and threats contained in liberty over security.  While not all women are physically and emotionally ordained by their morphology to trade away their liberties, the majority will and so do.  This reality so significantly alters the political landscape and the Constitutional protections afforded every citizen - women holding the ability to vote should be reconsidered and alternative means rendered and provided for women to express their instinctual security needs and behaviors.