Patriotism
(Top Posts - Social/Legal - 070408 to 072008)


Excerpts from posts made in Patriotism thread,
from July 4, 2008 to July 20, 2008:

July 4, 2008

Someone wrote:

> [...] I ask each who sees this to pull up and read the
> declaration which we celebrate today with an eye
> towards understanding the meaning of its authors
> and its profound historical significance.

I replied to each post preceded with "
>"
marks, as follows:

- - -
Declaration of Independence
  http://tinyurl.com/decofind
- - -

The Declaration of Independence was
primarily a list of grievances against
King George III, stating the reasons
underlying the revolt, said reasons mak-
ing up most of the document.

Notably absent, any opposing views, or
any idea whatsoever that God or Nature's
God or the Creator (whatever supposed
supreme authority the writers of the DoI
were referencing, there) might be inclined
to favor those on the opposite side of the
revolt.

Typically empty, the calls to supreme author-
ity which have been used by all groups who
lean on lip service to religion for power,
always stating that the supposed supreme
authority is on their side, without one iota
of evidence that a supreme authority either
exists -or- is in favor of a particular side in
a war or civil war or revolt.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> When the will to power is in charge,
> the higher the ideals, the lower the results.

> - Lao Tzu


Will to power, was that part of the revolt
which established this country?

High ideals, didn't the revolt have high
ideals?

Lower the results, didn't the revolt have
the desired result, and wasn't the result
a reflection of high ideals?

- - -

July 5, 2008

Someone wrote:

> the core premise of the DOI is that the "Creator"
> indowed humam beings with rights.

> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
> men are created equal, that they are endowed by
> their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that
> among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
> happiness."


The DoI mentions "their Creator", not "the
Creator". As humankind has learned since
then, "their Creator" is at least a result of
a multi-billion year process entailing the
totality of naturalistic events and evolution
in this particular universe we happen to
find ourselves in.

Also revealing, the possibility (some scien-
tists go so far as to state it in terms of high
probability) that the particular space-time
continuum we happen to exist in is but one
of an infinite number. In that context, if true,
"their Creator" would, technically consist
of the totality of that infinity unless one
chose to constrain his perspective to merely
the events occurring since our particular
space-time continuum began.

As for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of hap-
piness", this country has acted in a manner
counter to those basic principles at times,

 o committing acts of war on its enemies
    resulting in loss of life to enemy combat-
    ants -and- civilians,

 o murdering individuals as a result of trials
    which (since DNA evidence became a
    part of the judicial process) have been
    shown to have been (in an alarming
    number of cases) *dead wrong*,

 o committing act of war on itself (the Amer-
    ican Civil War),

 o denying liberty to blacks and negroes and
    native Americans and many immigrants
    during large stretches of history,

    and

 o witness the debacles that have occurred in
    an effort to oppose pursuit of happiness
    via alcohol prohibition and via the current
    drug prohibition (aka, the drug war on
    Americans and on the entire world to the
    extent that America has caused other coun-
    tries to imprison or kill its drug producers
    or users).

- - -

Also, on the "pursuit of happiness" front, in
actuality, the stark disparity in the economic
and health status of the American citizenry
reveals that America has failed to live up to
the ideal of the Constitution, by instituting
policies that have widened the gap between
rich and poor, that have created a hierarchy
of greed and 'rich get richer' at the tiny top
of the spectrum, with the overwhelming
majority little more than slaves to a corrupt
system predisposed to shifting most of the
wealth away from most of the people.

It's been that way for a long time, and it has
only worsened under the -8- years 'neath the
Bushies.

- - -

July 6, 2008

Someone wrote:

> I have no reason to believe the founders of the USA
> were under the notion of a limited Creator. And
> conceptually it is you kind who seek to differentiate
> between a universe and a multiverse, the wole of the
> multiverse can be described as a universe ... but for
> sake of clarity let's us call thing whole the cosmos
> and that creation of all things are a product of an
> eternal process of evolution.

> from that perspective do you disagrree with the following?

> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men
> are created equal, that they are endowed by their
> Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among
> these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."


Technically, the aspiration for equality is
noble, but point-in-fact, due to both genetic
differences and to the inequality pervasive
in this country's long-lived dispensation
iterated in the previous post, we are not
created with equal opportunities for life,
nor are we created with equal opportun-
ities for the pursuit of happiness.

Liberty, to the extent that America can
be a country in which individuals are free
from economic slavery, therein resides
true liberty, and in that, the country has
thus far failed.

True freedom, true equality, true liberty,
and true opportunity to pursue happiness,
the greatest hope for those resides in the
pro-human scientific efforts to free us from
the limits of our natural evolution, as well
as from political efforts to view equality
(aka, egalitarianism) and pursuit of happi-
ness as potentially freeing for all, by virtue
of its ability to lift everyone to a better world
in which poverty, disease, naturalistic threats,
and human-caused disasters become a regret-
table part of our past, rather than an ongoing
risk to our present and future.

- - -

July 7, 2008

Someone wrote:

> [...] I still wonder if you are a soulless throw
> back ... evolution is complex.


Pitiful comment/insult, "soulless throw back".

Was that an attempt to criticize my passionate
embrace of rejecting the anti-human aspects
of religion, as well as rejecting the premise
that an anti-human (by religions) contradic-
tory (by religions) created (by men, mostly,
but followed by women, in large part, in
modern times) God should be believed in,
feared and loved?

- - -

Someone wrote:

> Because we have often failed to live up to the nobilty
> of our national purpose does not negate the the truth
> of the DOI


As stated, the "created equal" aspect of the DoI
is patently false, from the standpoint of genetics
(that the writers of the DoI had no knowledge of)
and from the manner in which much (if not most)
of our fate is predetermined based on genetic facts
of which none of us has any control whatsoever
over our genetic destinies, among them the proba-
bilities of getting

 o cancer,
 o type 1 diabetes,
 o mental disease,
 o depression,
 o heart disease,
 o schizophrenia,
 o birth defects,
 o alzheimer's,
 o Parkinson's disease,
 o lupus,
 o hay fever,
 o Sudden Infant Death Syndrome,
 o strokes,
    and
 o our actualized physical appearances
    and personalities which are genetic-
    ally predetermined to a large extent.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> we have made great progress ... at the price of war
> and great humility and even constitutional ammendment
> we have freed all citizens will to except the responsibilities
> of self government - even women are now free from the
> yoke of chattle slavery.


That didn't occur until the 20th century,
revealing a blatant flaw in the DoI and
the Constitution's failure to create actua-
lized equality for *all* Americans from
the get-go.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> And revolution of self government which was pushed forward
> by the DOI is still spreading amoung mankind.

> A slave is compelled under the statues of a sovereign nation
> by brute force (usually torture) to work soley for the benefit
> of another.


An economic slave is compelled under
threat of death and poverty and high risk
of being imprisoned or killed and high
risk of suffering social and health con-
sequences deleterious to survival (not
to mention all the brainwashing Ameri-
cans are subjected to from birth to induce
them to become economic slaves) to
work primarily for the benefits of the
rich and powerful.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> Today each and every citizen of the USA is free to choose to
> their occupation. And have a vote which they may exercise
> whereby they participate in the process of self government and
> thereby are not taxed without representation. Further if the
> rights of anyone, citizen or not, are violated they may seek
> redress in open court.

> The only people in a condition of servitude in the USA are
> convicted criminals.


You're blind to economic slavery.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> Our courts are still quite flawed. The legal system favors
> the rich and is rasict in effect though not in letter of the law.
> Still there is still due process.

> Anyone can even found a political party ... and if they have
> the charisma for it can change the system completey via due
> process.

> Our system is flawed because we are a government of the
> people, and people often make errors.


You've mentioned the DoI as a source of
pride for you. I've merely pointed out its
shortfalls, and until you realize that the
DoI has shortfalls (and isn't 'holy', just as
the so-called 'holy' bible and 'holy' quran
and 'holy' vedas have their shortfalls, and
aren't 'holy'), you'll realize that its failures
can and should be addressed, directly and
incontrovertibly.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> "free us from the limits of our natural evolution" your
> buddies in the Khmer Rouge tried that once (almost
> word for word as I recall) ... it didn't work very well.

Your flames fall empty (as lies), and that
group did not institute pro-human anything,
instead instituting mass murder, something
this country's religious majority should be
able to identify with being that their found-
ing faith was used, for close to 2,000 years,
to discriminate against, torture, or mur-
der those who disbelieved or who believed
in a deity or deities in a manner they dis-
agreed with.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> and who the hell are you to declare the limits of the human
> race?


Read that paragraph you referenced again,
as your brain misinterpreted the paragraph
in a manner so far removed from what was
stated that it casts serious doubt on your
ability to rationally deal with the utmost
promise of the most positive aspects of
human potential.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> Poverty (in the modern USA) is most often the result of being
> born into a difficult circumstance and lacking the self disipline
> to overcome such. [...]

Self-serving right-wing guilt-tripping
rich-engrandizing misperception that
most Americans are suffering from
regarding the way they've been influ-
enced to blame others as causal in what-
ever poverty or other maladies they're
suffering from, and to dispossess their
own selves of all-but a minute amount
of responsibility to energetically and
passionately oppose the system of eco-
nomic enslavement most are currently
entrapped by (as well as to energetically
and passionately oppose all of the other
maladies).

- - -

July 14, 2008

Someone wrote:

> [...] I consider the Creation of all things to have
> been accomplished via evelution, including the
> human soul. [...]


Typo? As for the naturalistic proces-
ses entailed in the physics of evolution,
at what point, if any, do you view those
as deviating from naturalism and tran-
sitioning to a supernatural (i.e., non-
natural) miraculous realm many refer
to as "God"?

If you do believe that there is such a
point, what evidence, if any, do you
have to support such a notion, and
what evidence, if any, do you have that
such a being (or beings) typically re-
ferred to as "God" actually exists?

Put another way, do you have any
evidence whatsoever that naturalism
is finite, that it ends in the past, and
that all that exists prior to that end
is supernatural, typically referred to
as "God" by those of various reli-
gious faiths?

To carry that thought further, what
scientific principle would you use
to support a contention that magic
beings and magic places which defy
the laws of physics (via events oft-
times called "miracles" by believers)
are anything other than manifesta-
tions of human myth and imagina-
tion, along with a huge load of pre-
tense, deceit, and devious manipu-
lation of the human psyche from
a very young age?

A wise (but devious) sage once stated

"Promise them a pleasant immortality,
scare them with thoughts of an unplea-
sant immortality, have them get on their
knees and think they're talking to a sup-
posed almighty being, asking it for things,
tell them that supposed almighty being
loves them and may answer their requests
in a positive way, tell them to fear what
will happen to them if they don't believe
you, and if you start that process at a
very young age, you have a very good
chance of getting them to believe and do
almost anything."

Seductions, promises, -and- fear, the
foundation stones of all religions, present
and past.

- - -

July 20, 2008

Someone wrote:

> [...]
> patriotic Americans hold the all are equal and are
> endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights [...]

Clearly, all are not equal, based on the
irrefutable evidence I've presented in
this thread, based on genetics, based
on life circumstances, based on the
manner in which life deals different
hands to each of us. As for aspiring
to equality, that has thus far *not*
been the modus operandi of the U.S.,
in far too many instances, though pro-
gress has been made in some areas.

As for the creation of each of us, that
is a naturalistic process far beyond
the limited understanding that the
writers of the DoI had. As for rights,
including the right to life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness, that has been
addressed in this thread as to the suc-
cess and lack thereof in the U.S. meet-
ing those goals, thus far.

- - -

Someone wrote:

> [...]
> the success of the USA is due to its recognition
> of human rights (and the source thereof) and its
> willingness to not use righteous might to destroy
> those who (like you) have no respect for human
> rights


You're incorrect.

I have great respect for human rights.

The source of all is nature, every last
iota of everything flows therefrom,
including all the contradictory imag-
inations that evolved apes have come
up with and asserted as Truth regard-
ing supposed magic 'all-powerful' be-
ings (allah, jinns, the devil, devils, satan,
jesus, god, holy spirit, angels, vishnu,
krishna, etc. -- see religions for all
the contradictory tales, none of which
have any evidence whatsoever for exist-
ence outside the human imagination).

By the way, your so-called source, what
does that source offer in the way of human
rights to those who don't believe in it in
the supposedly 'right' manner proscribed
by religions? Per many believers, eternal
death or eternal torment are in the cards
for those folks, and I guarantee you, that's
as big of a ZERO in the way of human
rights that can be imagined.

Nah, it's not human rights that your reli-
gion is about, it's believing and following
and frightening folks into following and
brainwashing young children via seduc-
tions and scare tactics, and all that, just
look at what the result has been, a long
list of bloodshed and torture and freedom-
denied and the cause of all that resides in
the so-called holy scripts of religions that
followers like you still promote as Truth,
no evidence required, for believers say
just believe based on trust in hearsay and
magical tales, many of which have been
irrefutably proven to be fabrications -and-
deceit, loaded with contradictions -and-
anti-humanism.

- - -