Tuesday, October 21, 2014

response to Rory Patrick's 100 day masturbation abstinence - the pain and sorrow of having genitals

A man (Rory Patrick) abstains from touching his penis for 100 days. Supporters then express solemn tearful solidarity with him.

An interview of the man:

http://www.vice.com/read/our-interview-with-a-guy-who-didnt-masturbate-for-100-days-722
Quote from interview: "...On April 5, 2014, Rory Patrick announced to his Twitter followers that he was going to stop masturbating for 100 days. Soon, a hashtag was started: #Rory100. Friends and supporters cheered him on, sent him messages of encouragement..."
Respondents from his supporters as found at #Rory100: "...solidarity. we love you..." "...I believe..."...in my heart I believe in u & ur miracles..."
My response to all:

Oh the pain & sorrow, of having genitals. The great solidarity raised by three fingers, of others, offering great & wonderful support to the protagonist.

As I viewed the people's responses at #Rory100 I felt amazed, annoyed, and sick. My fuck what did the guy do? Abstain from touching his penis for 100 days? That warrants tearful wondrous support for the guy? WTF?

In any case:

The left bemoans the fact that we have genitals at all, nearly as much as the right does.

The left is unhappy that genitals can be used to make babies.

The right is unhappy that genitals can be used for things other than making babies.

And both seem to get pretty upset when your average sexual urge interferes with your ability to do other activities.

Oh, if there were just a way to separate out this part of our brain, right?

But, to do so is IMO abusive. For example the Mormon flavor of abusiveness:
http://corvus.freeshell.org/corvus_corax/two/life_path/Mortal_Mormonism.htm
and http://mormoncurtain.com/topic_markepeterson.html
and http://www.lds-mormon.com/only.shtml

And then there's Islam:
http://nowscape.com/islam/Islam_masturbation.htm

These religious prophets, leaders, and scholars hear you Mr. Patrick. They've got their three fingers up in solidarity with you. So do the Victorians and Puritans.

100 days without masturbating? Who gives a flip (rephrase in the common Internet colloquialism as you please).

I fully agree there can be some value in abstaining say for a few days, or maybe for up to two weeks. So that you can, for example, focus on finding a real in the flesh date or mate. But concepts like Karezza are in my view dangerous and abusive.

And the "solidarity" expressed sort of reminds me of World Hijab Day supporters. An excellent response: http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2013/02/01/world-hejab-day/

And then there's cancer:
Masturbation 'cuts cancer risk'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3072021.stm

And more recent health benefit articles:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2518802/Masturbation-good-health-prevents-cystitis-diabetes-cancer.html

Yes perhaps our moods would be more even if we didn't have genitals. But if we didn't have them we wouldn't be here. So don't look too closely at the mouth of this wonderful gift horse (if that's a good analogy - whatever).

Yes it's good that sex results in kids, and it should. The childfree life has a higher probability of being an empty one.

But it's also mostly ok that outliers like gays can have sex. They can contribute to society, and sex can help their lives be more happy. That's fine too. So both sides are wrong, and right, on these issues.

Potentially related posts:

Self-hatred in the "skeptical" community via angry neurotic so-called "feminists"
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2012/07/self-hatred-in-skeptical-community-via.html

Subverting normal human sexuality: Mormon Church's principal crime
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2012/12/subverting-normal-human-sexuality.html

whitewashing history -- sex obsessed ancestors -- nudist hypocrisy
and explorations & activities after leaving Mormonism: nudism, & Temple Square protests
at http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/puritan

Karezza is dangerous & abusive - reuniting.info: teaches us to be afraid of orgasms, very afraid
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/03/karezza-is-dangerous-abusive.html

Issues with being "childfree:"
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/childfree

Announcement: Ok, I'm not opposed to gay marriage and gay adoption
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/09/announcement-ok-im-not-opposed-to-gay.html

Monday, October 6, 2014

Balkan Erotic Epic - part of the set of short films in Destricted - commentary & review

Part of the film Destricted - a collection of short films that all showed during Sundance.

http://history.sundance.org/films/3508/destricted

Balkan Erotic Epic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4cjqgcSri0

The US version of the Destricted DVD lacks this short film for some reason. Without this short in the collection the DVD really is incomplete.

Additional review of the short film, with comments by Lady Gaga:
http://dangerousminds.net/comments/sex_magick_marina_abramovics_balkan_erotic_epic_nsfw

Yes, the full version of Destricted, including the Balkan short film, did show at the humble Broadway theater (Salt Lake Film Society) during Sundance in 2006. How does Robert Redford stand living in Utah County? Sooo icky poo. The brain washed bubble. But, I guess even the mobots down there can't stop some artists from L.A. doing their thing high in the mountains.

Maybe some found Destricted dull. It wasn't dull for me in 2006. I had to pinch myself: Am I still in Utah? OMG, this film is actually playing here in a real theater? Yes it was. Revolutionary for a Mormon boy to see that Salt Lake could finally host such a thing.

The perversions of Brigham Young & Joseph Smith, with 14 & 15 year old wives & the wives of other men, and the perversions of Spencer Kimball, with his Miracle of Forgiveness house of horrors evil book - finally receive a small humble & healthy response with a film like this showing during Sundance. Maybe in London they're already well past worry about Victorian style intrusions into the private lives of their citizenry. But things like this still happen in Mormon bishop's offices here. So, yes, this is one reason why having a film like this show in Salt Lake was important - to counter the hypocrisy, lies, and abuse present here w/in Mormon churches.

A review of each short film in the collection: http://letterboxd.com/gdw/film/destricted/

Some better reviews at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Destricted-Sativa-Rose/product-reviews/B003B2UK1S/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_5?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addFiveStar&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

A BBC reviewer found the film boring: http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2006/08/30/destricted_2006_review.shtml

Another review: http://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/destricted-film-review-by-themroc

The 2006 version, in PAL format - may play on some computers in the US maybe:
http://www.amazon.com/Destricted-NON-USA-FORMAT-PAL-Reg-2/dp/B00J46UAA6/

2010 version, sadly lacking the Balkan film:
http://www.amazon.com/Destricted-Sativa-Rose/dp/B003B2UK1S/

For all I know all of the shorts have made it onto youtube & other forums. You can check yourself. But I'm glad to see that one of the shorts I found to be of interest, and which was omitted from the 2010 US version, did make it onto youtube & other sites.

Friday, October 3, 2014

latest thoughts on how atheism is a de facto religion

Found this on facebook:
"Atheism is a religion" I see that is the new thing going around. This is simply NOT true!!
My response:

Using all caps does not increase the validity of an argument.

If political ideology & goals have been brought into one or more atheist groups you belong to, which I'm sure they HAVE, then yes you have a de facto religion.

Are children blank slates? The modern denial of human nature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blank_Slate

Are the wages of sin, death (in other words, are there very good fully natural evolutionary reasons religions came up with prohibitions regarding destructive behaviors)?
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29442642

More general counter-counter commentary:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/

Additional humanist counter-theory:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/

The more popular groups, such as CFI, American Atheists, and national humanist groups do very much have political goals & ideologies engrained in their core group "missions." And so, rather like the creationists do with Darwinian evolution & the god concept, they put the cart before the horse.

Oh, and pot does rot your brain...
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/16/casual-marijuana-use-may-damage-your-brain/

http://io9.com/5903837/what-cannabis-actually-does-to-your-brain

Add Atheist Community of Austin and Atheists of Utah to the list of new religions.

A single atheist may not be a religion. But when more than one is gathered in the name of a political ideology, they quickly become one, de facto.

Recovery from Atheists of Utah
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/recovery-from-atheists-of-utah.html

Do you all see a difference between being an atheist and being antireligion? | Atheism is a religion
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/04/do-you-all-see-difference-between-being.html

Shermer on confirmation bias:
http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Liberal anger at being human - Criticisms of California Senate Bill SB 967

Debunking the dominant paradigm - a never ending job.

Here, specifically, the State tells us exactly how to have sex:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB967
"...lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent..."

Who says?

This is the government of California telling everyone in colleges in California, exactly, how to have sex.

The abusers deserve to be locked up. But this goes too far. And wrongful accusers can be abusers as well.

More criticisms of the bill:

http://www.thefire.org/fire-statement-on-california-affirmative-consent-bill/

http://www.independent.com/news/2014/aug/11/affirmative-consent-u/

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/churchformen/2014/09/men-the-sexual-revolution-is-over/

http://www.city-journal.org/2014/cjc0718bb.html

And sometimes even the libertarians are right:

http://libertarianviewpoint.com/blog/california-government-proposes-license-law-for-consensual-sex/
"...it is fundamentally abhorrent for the government to be in your bedroom..."
also check out:
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/29/jerry-brown-signs-bill-telling-college-k

It's also abhorrent for the church to be in your bedroom as well (eg: your average Mormon bishop or Catholic priest).

http://corvus.freeshell.org/corvus_corax/two/life_path/Mortal_Mormonism.htm

Rape laws are already on the books. But this new law goes way too far. Plus it's based on a lie - the one in five lie. More info:

1 in 5: Debating the Most Controversial Sexual Assault Statistic
http://time.com/2934500/1-in-5%E2%80%82campus-sexual-assault-statistic/

2.5% probably, not 20.

Quote from article:
"...This means that 2.5% of women are sexually assaulted in college, not 20%..."
In the military the risks to women are higher than in the general population that's true. In college the risks are less.

And dually-boozing partners who have buyer's remorse afterward should not be included in any rape statistics.

Politifact's take:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/may/02/are-20-percent-women-sexually-assaulted-they-gradu/

Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/05/01/one-in-five-women-in-college-sexually-assaulted-the-source-of-this-statistic/

Judgy Bitch chimes in:
http://judgybitch.com/2014/04/30/i-am-now-officially-sick-of-rape-culture-bullshit/

Interesting comments:
http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_politics.htm

From the above:
"...a view held by many on the left that presumes man is born a blank slate..."
OMG! The Blank Slate! Remember that one!

Pinker debunks the blank slate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blank_Slate
...see related videos of Pinker talking about this on youtube & TED.

Humans are not born blank slates, and leftists work to deny human nature in huge ways. Righties deny human nature in other ways (& truth & facts). But it's sad to see that both sides are in denial.

From Wendy McElroy:
http://blog.panampost.com/editor/2014/04/14/the-big-lie-of-a-rape-culture/

From Caroline Kitchens:
Rape Hysteria & the Rape Culture Lie Must End
http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/rape-hysteria-the-rape-culture-lie-must-end-jessicavalenti-rapeculture/

Anyway I agree that NFL jocks who hit their girlfriends & wives should be ejected. I agree that abusers who break the law should be locked up.

There *may* be "rape culture" in some hiphop music. But it's way too non-PC to be honest about that...

Also rape is about sex, not just about control. I have no idea why people say it's not about sex. How do they know? And what happens during rape anyway?

Is rape about control or sex?
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/is-rape-about-control-or-sex
"...Evolutionary psychologists have been at pains to show that rape is actually a sexual crime through which men seek sexual gratification from women who would otherwise refuse them..."
related blog post:

Why do rapists rape? For power or sex?
http://emmatheemo.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/why-do-rapists-rape-for-power-or-sex-lets-ask-a-rapist/

from apparently conservative blogger
http://glaivester.blogspot.com/2006/03/rape-is-about-sex-duh.html
"...Which leads in to the reason why we keep hearing that rape is not about sex. It is philosophically untenable to keep pushing the boundaries of the sexual revolution without making rape seem less and less violative by comparison, as the act which is coerced in rape becomes less and less private, personal, and valued in society. So the only way to retain the sense of horror at rape is to alter the rationale for rape being bad; that the goal is total violation, so that the violence becomes the issue; rather than the horror coming from the intimacy of the act which was forced upon the victim, which is the old rationale..."
---

A tough topic but it's important to be honest. There's fear mongering & inappropriate shaming on the left that needs to be debunked, called out, and resisted.

Forcibly imposed upon self, and all people, undue flagellation & shame, because yes some humans are criminals or abusers. But not everyone is and we all shouldn't be treated like we are.

Anger and hatred at being human, at all humans, because a few humans do bad things. Now that is a type of "rape culture," rape of a different kind.

Both the right AND the left seek to use & abuse students in colleges & universities for their own ends. Both sides tell them lies, about human nature, and the truth.

A portion of the "sexual revolution" has, can, and does destroy families (ie: advocacy for non-monogamy, for the "childfree" life, for disposable marriages, and for seeking to have a general disconnect between sexuality & reproduction - all incredibly abusive tenants of the revolution).

The parts of the revolution that advocate for honesty, education, having more fun with our partners, being less inhibited with our partners, and not shaming for adults viewing other adults sexual activities (eg: sexuality expressed in art & film) - yes those are some generally good parts. But seeking to outright deny human nature, and decouple sex from having babies is evil & abusive.

Both sides have an agenda: to hide the truth in their own ways.

Yes evolution by natural selection did happen. No there is no god. But, on the other hand you can really fuck up your life if you "choose" to live a wastrel childfree life when you could have, and should have, had some kids. You can fuck up your children via adultery and believing you can easily bail on your husband or wife.

Separating yourself too far from the tree of life, and from basic human nature, can screw up your life & the lives of others.

Oh, and a certain percentage of humans will be naturally born criminals (sociopaths & worse). Lock them up, I very much agree...

---

p.s. Found this video;

Friday, September 12, 2014

Thomas Rowlandson's erotic engravings.

Thomas Rowlandson (1756-1827), erotic engravings.

From http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rowlandson_erotic_engravings

To view larger versions of the images, use Firefox or Chrome, then right click on any image, and select either "view image," or "open image in new tab."













































the sexual, mostly positive, but sometimes negative, art of Mihály Zichy

The sexual, mostly positive, but sometimes negative (but honest), art of Mihály Zichy

Mihály Zichy (1827 to 1906).

Born in Hungary.

Drawings as in the book Liebe (the quality of love, pleasure, joy, favor, love).

Full title: Liebe. Vierzig Zeichnungen

http://scanzen.tumblr.com/tagged/zichy-mih%C3%A1ly
http://scanzen.tumblr.com/tagged/zichy+mih%C3%A1ly/page/2
http://scanzen.tumblr.com/tagged/zichy+mih%C3%A1ly/page/3
http://scanzen.tumblr.com/tagged/zichy+mih%C3%A1ly/page/4
http://scanzen.tumblr.com/tagged/zichy+mih%C3%A1ly/page/5

A few of the drawings are a bit disturbing, in that they show the more deviant (justifiably-lockable-up) side of human sexual behavior. But there's healthy depictions in other drawings.

It's worth making note of the truth (and locking away the abusers when necessary). Celibate the good & healthy. Lock up the abusers though. His drawings show both sides.

Found a few copies of the book:
http://www.en.zvab.com/advancedSearch.do?title=Liebe++Vierzig+Zeichnungen&author=Zichy

Monday, September 8, 2014

whitewashing history -- sex obsessed ancestors -- nudist hypocrisy

In school, they completely whitewashed history.

Check out these caricatures through 1827 by Thomas Rowlandson...

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rowlandson

In listening to Sister Wendy at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a4GbfVBEjs&t=1m32s
she complains of Puritanism AND feminism. Why is that?

Disgust about shame regarding sex from the right AND the left. I think that's what makes Sister Wendy upset.

From the 1524 book I Modi (The Ways):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/EneeDidon.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Modi

...found one copy for $50:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=12297590527&searchurl=kn%3DI%2BModi%253A%2BThe%2BSixteen%2BPleasures%26amp%3Bsts%3Dt%26amp%3Bx%3D0%26amp%3By%3D0

We recently watched the documentary at
https://indieflix.com/indie-films/beyond-naked-35063/
(log onto your local library website first to view it free).
...Beyond Naked - about nude biking during an art festival in Seattle.

One key thing that struck me about the film was when one very fat woman, who's nude with her husband at home 99% of the time, offered fearful & crass advise regarding penile erections to the participants.

A very unattractive fat woman with rolls and rolls of fat is going to offer advise to men about the state of their penises when they're nude?

Ironic. Strange. A leftist hippie form of sexual shaming. And key denialism from the "nudist" camp regarding what nudity is always partly about, that is when adults are present and can see each other - you know, the S word that they fear so much. 

Related links:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/06/explorations-activities-after-leaving.html
http://agalltyr.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/nudistsnaturists-are-not-special/
and http://drglennsmith.co.uk/RES-000-22-0569-5k.pdf
..."Mainstream  naturism  relies  on  discriminatory  and  dishonest  practices  to  manage
sexuality that limits the diversity of the  naturist population and presents  an  image and
culture that lacks integrity and transparency..." Damn right.

Am I for 100% nudism all the time? No. Why? Because there's crazies in the world who will do worse things than what they're already doing if everyone were nude. You know, the homeless nutjob who goes pee in front of your local Walmart, and worse nutjobs lurking. There's always a certain percent.

But, on the other hand, viewing films like The Good Old Naughty Days (available at many public libraries), and learning of the art in Pompeii, and the above more contemporary links, and books like the Kama Sutra are enlightening and eye opening & incredibly important as well - as are the works that Sister Wendy has shown us.

Life is a balancing act. How to balance between the Puritans on the right and the anti-porn anti-freedom hysterical feminazi hippies on the left? How to reject shame from the right and the left, while still remaining healthy, and free, and happy? It's hard work. But I think we need to be honest.

Humans very thinly hide their sexuality for some very good reasons. But on the other hand, if we hide it too much we can also become fucked up...

When naked adult humans can see each other, and one or both are not 100% ugly, there is a sexual component present, even if the participants are fundamentally dishonest about their status & state (eg: your average nudist in America & Europe).

Sex is hard wired into us. Hysterical leftist hippie nudists cannot rip that wiring out, any more than rightist Bishops & Priests can. It's there. There's no denying it. It does need some management I agree. But we can go too far either way. It's refreshing to know that our ancestors were obsessed - and for good reason. We would not be here otherwise, probably.

Saturday, August 23, 2014

The selective erection of the U.S. Border, for liberals -- We all live in one country? Yes! No double standards.

BBC news: The world is going to hell in a hand basket. We all live in one country. When a medieval / stone age barbarian kills people in "another country," they are really killing people in "your county," in our country too.

When it comes to illegal immigrants, liberals believe in erasing the border.

When it comes to people being killed in Iraq, boy howdy that U.S. border goes up damn quick for them.

Speakin' as a (now former) liberal myself - well a modified liberal who wants nothing to do with Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky, Glenn Greenwald, or etc.

An atheist watches Duck Dynasty, and likes it!

We watched Duck Dynasty last night, for the first time. A great show.

My wife enjoyed it very much. I remember when I was excommunicated from Atheists of Utah for expressing my appreciation for the duck people's general stance of challenging the new dominant paradigm, and advocacy for good old fashioned family values.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/duck-dynasty-pride-month.html

Hitchens quits the Nation.

http://www.thenation.com/article/taking-sides

"...In the past few weeks, though, I have come to realize that the magazine itself takes a side in this argument, and is becoming the voice and the echo chamber of those who truly believe that John Ashcroft is a greater menace than Osama bin Laden..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPZFLROaouM

http://www.salon.com/2002/10/29/hitchens_6/

Juan Williams got tossed out of NPR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76KH0Ym51yQ

Where's a Hitch when you need him?

Maybe my views on the whole gay thing are softening a bit, but the de facto cult status of Stonewall is still ringing in my ears. I know of the gentle service oriented gays. But I also know of the wastrels who happily befriend convicted pedos. Can we separate the Truman Capote types from the service oriented ones? The people interested in real service to humanity, instead of vain wastrel tail chasing bullcrap?

Friday, August 8, 2014

August 8, 2014: Moving left

My experiment with touching my toe into the pool of conservative ideology is largely over. One too many worshipers of Ayn Rand showing up on "The Atheist Conservative's" page? Was that the tipping point? Maybe.

Being away from wastrels from the past, and their abusive friends, has helped. Plus being married, having two kids, and a wife with zero association with all the crap I've seen has helped also. Still taking a step back. But becoming more compassionate & open to hearing what the left has to say. The right is generally increasingly poopy smelling. The left, not so much. So, I'm a left-leaning moderate as of now.

Friday, July 4, 2014

Happy 4th of July! Human are humans, in a tipi or out.



On the 4th of July liberals are upset about America even existing at all.

Should the borders be fully opened?

Mexican drug gangs that kill en masse would move right in, more than they already are in Mexico.

As for the "indigenous" "native" oh so noble savages:

Using heads in football:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_ballgame
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_ballgame#cite_note-56
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Maya_culture

More:
http://tvliberty.blogspot.com/2007/09/steven-pinker-debunks-noble-savage-myth.htmlhttps://twitter.com/sapinker/status/298096581293535233


Human are humans, in a tipi or out.

Humans will migrate & expand. But once a certain saturation point on the land has been reached, they'll erect borders so as to protect what's already been set up.

Does this mean I believe there should be no immigration from the south? No. But not everything is equal. And there was actually some value to the landing of Columbus, even if it also had a terribly high cost.

The movement of humans across the land & sea, due to increasing technology, was inevitable.

If the so-called natives had had guns & so on, they could have fended off the conquistadors.

Why weren't pre-Columbian American cultures as technologically advanced as Europe? Probably: resources & agriculture available in Europe.

Any person who's born in a place is a native.

Everyone is racist, especially people who claim they aren't.

But travel and first hand exposure to other cultures, does widen the mind, and it also widens our in group morality.

Whitees today are not responsible for the sins of other humans who happened to be white. To claim as much is not only intellectually dishonest, it's racist. On the other hand I'm very much for reparations for slavery, and for the genocide committed against the American Indians. That's fine. Doesn't mean "whitey" is responsible. But the sins of past humans, which have placed certain other groups of humans in a hole - those sins need to be made up for, by the society as a whole, by working to repair the damage.

On the other hand if you make a person or group too dependent, that can also be abusive. So a one-time-very-large reparation should probably be done both for blacks & Indians in America. Maybe giving more valuable city & farm land to Blacks & Indians, instead of just way-out-in-the-fucking-boonies away-from-everything dry desolate unfarmable land. And the Indian Health Service is a very good thing.

What did the Romans ever do for us?


Additional thoughts in a related post:

Noble Savages? Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez, Wikileaks, Bolivia, Amerindians (American Indians), and so on.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/07/noble-savages-edward-snowden-julian.html

commentary on: 300 Articles You Have to Read to Understand What Is Meant by the Term "Homofascism"

Commentary on the following article:

300 Articles You Have to Read to Understand What Is Meant by the Term "Homofascism"
http://englishmanif.blogspot.com/2014/07/300-articles-you-have-to-read-to.html

The first article about the 14 year old is a prime example of why I now disable comments on most of my youtube videos. I've left commenting enabled on my blog. But a certain percentage of all people are sociopaths & so on.

My own personal experience of expressing some much needed rebellion and skepticism within an atheist group:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/recovery-from-atheists-of-utah.html

The rather ironic thing about the group in question is this:

When a previous leader of a leftist atheist group he took over has a kid with an excommunicated-from-another atheist group pro-life atheist woman.

A of U unilaterally absorbed into themselves a long standing group formerly known as Salt Lake Valley Atheists. During an SLVA meeting about four years ago a rare pro-life atheist woman was told she wasn't welcome because SLVA had determined that ultra-liberal politics & social policy advocacy was a key thing they were about. Atheists of Utah was headed up by an older guy whose wife was dying. He hooked up with this pro-life atheists whom SLVA kicked out & had a kid with her. He also did outreach work to the gay pride festival here. The legacy of his outreach work was this: Only a few years later Atheists of Utah had a.) unilaterally dissolved & absorbed SLVA, and b.) become headed up by mostly people from the local Stonewall center, and c.) determined that they would incorporate into their whole being the ultra-liberal social & political stance of SLVA whom they had absorbed into themselves.

Why is this ironic? Because the guy who headed up A of U only a few years before had a kid with a pro-life atheist woman whom herself had been previously rejected by SLVA.

Seculars do need to have more kids. The ready acceptance of gay "marriage" is a symptom of a much larger problem with the left as a whole.

Slow motion suicide.

http://www.amazon.com/Decline-Fall-Europes-Motion-Suicide/dp/B0096EPE48

Many former LDS move to the LDC.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/ldc

...and end up having zero kids of their own.

Here's a prime example of this in leftist atheist culture:

A-hole (IMO) P.Z. Myers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ch1XFqmGeM&t=19m10s

Oh my god listening to this man makes me sick. I can only take about 4 minutes of the guy and then I feel like I'm going to throw up. He of course directly discounts the fact that his 13.8 billion year evolved body managed to produce children. His views & protrayal of this KEY part of human existence is sickening and sick.

More examples of scummyness of the man:

PZ Myers isn't a feminist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OhbLDFeE4w

PZ Myers accuses Shermer of rape
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WA4qtemcUs

13.8 billion years, and then there's this guy. A shallow and petty view of evolution by natural selection, from a biologist. A biologist who's been fully brain washed by LDC dogma.

Remember when the four horsemen came out with their various books? Dawkins. Hitchens. Harris. Dennett. Those were the days. But when atheists form social groups they almost invariably integrate their dogmatic political views as key agenda points in their groups. Shermer may have his head in the sand about gay "marriage," but he does have a point about confirmation bias:

http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/

The ready application of the use of the word "marriage" to gay civil unions really is about denying basic human nature. Active denial, and being a traitor to, the 13.8 billion year process that brought you and I here today. A person can either tie directly into that whole process, by reproducing themselves, or if not they can sometimes (and often in leftist-circles) buy into a whole culture that is in active rebellion against that 13.8 billion year process.

Is sexual reproduction trivial?

Do children need a mommy & a daddy?

Is everything equal?

No. Yes. No.

Gayness is a side effect of how sex gets set up in humans. A side effect. Not a primary effect. The primary effect results in reproduction. Children come from reproduction.

Any oh so natural vegan, and Whole Foods shopper, should recognize the high value in raising children in a more natural & healthy way. And adopted kids should have an environment which most closely matches the natural & health way.

Federal Appeals Court: Gays Have Right to Marry, And Everyone Has AIDS!
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/federal-appeals-court-gays-have-right.html

Why is "gay pride" so strong in Salt Lake City? Because of the abusive stances of BOTH the Mormon Church and the Stonewall responders.

Saturday, June 28, 2014

"The faith and family (formerly) left" is the group which most closely matches my views...

America's mushy middle: eight types of voters:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28025641

Thanks 1.3 billion Chinese, oh and the Black Atheists of Atlanta, and even your average Mexican, for helping me question the leftists who hate "breeders," and life, and who are essentially wastrels part of a destructive death cult.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/forget-republican-or-democrat-americans-divide-by-their-values/2014/06/27/00e86ac4-fe2c-11e3-91c4-01dcd9b73086_story.html

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/am-i-a-faith-and-family-leftist/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=am-i-a-faith-and-family-leftist

There's often zero room in your average atheist / humanist / Unitarian Universalist group for people who question the incredibly naive, dangerous, destructive, denialistic, nihilistic, narcissistic, denial of human nature, history, evolutionary biology, and so on, social positions of the left. The leftist death cult. Yes, I'm skeptical of that! Life is more important than these wastrels & their kin. Oh, but wait, they usually don't have children. But breeders will inherit the Earth...

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/breeders-will-inherit-earth-problems.html

Additional thoughts including how Unitarian Universalism and the ultra-left is very similar to the Shaker religion.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/shakers

All the many grey haired people at the First Unitarian Church in Salt Lake City. Very few children. And a general cultural hatred for having children.

STFU Parents:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/stfu%20parents

Childfree:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/childfree

De facto celibacy. Slow motion suicide.
http://www.amazon.com/Decline-Fall-Europes-Motion-Suicide/dp/B0096EPE48

Childfree yourself & everyone afflicted by the memetic dissease that infects your brain, right out of existence...

And Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a eugenicist.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/03/margaret-sanger-also-amoral-fuck.html

These people just don't get it:
http://www.meetup.com/aofuslc/events/117023522/
http://www.slugmag.com/uploads/photos/img19665.jpg


Good without god? Well, maybe not.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/08/family-values-atheism-questioning.html

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/recovery-from-atheists-of-utah.html

Doesn't mean there is a god. But humanity may not quite be easily readily to go without this fully natural evolutionary trait (religion), like it or not.

-----------------------

July 2017 addendum:

I'm not longer in the leftist camp at all.

From socialist to very pro-capitalist.

From social leftist to social consevative.

Pro baby killing to pro life (with caveats for incest and rape, and only during very early pregnancy).

Against outlier 'marriage.' Children deserve to be in a normal-for-them environment, one which honors 1.2 billion years of sexual evolutionary history.

When leftists control the government they operate it in such a way which serves to deny their own evolutionary history and nature.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Federal Appeals Court: Gays Have Right to Marry, And Everyone Has AIDS!

Federal Appeals Court: Gays Have Right to Marry
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/court-utah-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional-24298290

And everyone has AIDS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StPTCo5qk8E

The extreme naivete of Unitarian Universalism, expressed yet again by having one of their churches headed up by a freakish extreme outlier:

http://archive.sltrib.com/images/2009/0619/gayunitarian_0620~3.jpg

...a particularly & acutely unattractive woman to man experiment.

How else UUs are naive:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-new-creed-of-unitarian-universalism.html

Heard that Mohamed was an advocate for social justice crap at the SVUUS.

This guy is welcomed into the gay community:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695261750/Secret-shame-Predator-was-coach-Scout-chief.html?pg=all

Gay "marriage" is a key indicator of how the left is in near complete denial of human nature, and evolutionary history.

It's still Duck Dynasty Pride Month:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/duck-dynasty-pride-month.html

And with the passing of Christopher, his brother Peter is becoming more appealing every day, even if he himself doesn't accurately identify where his own morals come from:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/im-in-hitchens-camp-christopher-before.html

Daniel Dennett's dangerous idea is one key: Religion is a natural phonomenon. Thus fully natural & useful human morality exists within religion.

We need protection from the pitfalls of human nature. Protection from outliers. Yes religion & culture help manage all this, for very natural & reasonable & rational & evolutionary reasons. An evolutionary response to how evolution has set us up.

So, judges can be incredibly naive. Even conservative ones. Outliers naturally come about. But they need to be a.) classified & identified for what they are, and b.) curtailed when they're destructive or dangerous. Not forcibly treated as "equal" in all venues IMO. For example maybe a child needs a mommy & daddy, ideally, for it's own best welfare & development - as a normal non-outlier child. Can the left (& libertarians) question their own presuppositions? Are they in denial about human nature also? I have observed that they are.

"Freaks Welcome Here." This is the key motto of the SVUUS, and of Unitarian Universalism / leftistism / atheism plus / most atheists groups. De facto.

But outliers won't inherit the Earth.

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/breeders-will-inherit-earth-problems.html

I agree with Adam Corolla on this point: "...I don’t want to be lying on my deathbed and realize gay marriage and legalization of marijuana is all I discussed the last half of my life..."

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/19/adam_carolla_where_are_all_the_jewish_roofers/

The UUs and their kin keep up the pressure.

Apartments? Ok. Jobs? Ok. Being funny? Yes please. Making art. Ok, good.

But raising kids? Not so fast.

When two John Thomases or two hoohaws can produce babies naturally, then there will be gay marriage.

Kids may well need a mommy & a daddy. 13.8 billion years of evolution by natural selection. Is that enough "proof?" Hey at least let's be skeptical of ripping children away form this long established fully natural non-outlier more-healthy norm, ok?

Even Dan Savage says that gay men are "pigs." Should two pigs raise a kid? Where's the naturally moderating force of a female human? The lesbian friends of the Dan-Savage-gay-couple? I don't think so.

Many gay "marriages" cheat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

Is a cheatin' marriage a good healthy place to raise kids?

A fully rational response:
https://4simpsons.wordpress.com/tag/same-sex-marriage/

And more general fully rational & reasonable responses:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Seculars-Against-Same-Sex-Marriage/293011477509961

http://secularpatriarchy.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/marriage-is-masculinity-and-coverture/

http://www.amazon.com/Conscience-Its-Enemies-Confronting-Institutions/dp/1610170709

Gayness is not a race:
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/05/1324/

Neither is Islam:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2012/08/islam-is-not-race-not-ethnicity-salt.html

Gayness is a side effect of how sex gets set up in humans. A side effect. Not a primary effect. The primary effect results in reproduction. Children come from reproduction.

Any oh so natural vegan, and Whole Foods shopper, should recognize the high value in raising children in a more natural & healthy way. And adopted kids should have an environment which most closely matches the natural & health way.

Not a single woman who has no intention of having a man around, knocking on the sperm bank door.

Not two men, or two women, knocking on the sperm bank or adoption agency doors.

Leftist denial of human nature & evolutionary history, all so they can claim to be protecting everyone's rights. What about the right of the majority to be protected from dangerous or destructive outliers? Indeed. We have that right too.

Thursday, June 19, 2014

I'm in the Hitchens camp. Christopher before. Peter now. Leftist denial of human nature.


I'm in the Hitchens camp. Christopher before. Peter now.

It's what happens after starting a family with a socially conservative atheist from rural China. No Bibles there.

Peter Hitchens vs Dan Savage


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQY4BuYWD4s

Listening to the incredibly crass way Dan Savage conducts himself is revealing. One wonders if he even knows where babies come from?

The left is in denial about human nature. Built in by evolution by natural selection good human values. Active denial. Dangerous denial. Abusive denial.

Agreed the Mormon Church abuses people. But so does the other side. It's hard to hold onto basic good human values when you've been so severely lied to & deceived. Takes time to recover. And then to recover from recovery.

Both the left & right are in denial about human nature. Both are rather highly upset at the prospect of admitting that we are human, set up by evolution by natural selection, to have build in morality, and an apparent propensity or high susceptibility for mysticism. The right doesn't like admitting that we are evolved animals. The left doesn't like admitting that we are evolved animals with built in morality & evolved culture - culture which helps us avoid the pitfalls built into human nature. Religion (AKA culture - ref Daniel Dennett) is a fully natural effect of how we've evolved.

Outliers naturally come about. But they need to be a.) classified & identified for what they are, and b.) curtailed when they're destructive or dangerous. Not forcibly treated as "equal" in all venues IMO. For example maybe a child needs a mommy & daddy, ideally, for it's own best welfare & development - as a normal non-outlier child. Can the left (& libertarians) question their own presuppositions? Are they in denial about human nature also? I have observed that they are.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/
http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/

And back to Peter, he was a leftist, then he moved more right. Same with me, after I met a socially conservative completely-non-bibical atheist from rural China.

My legacy website, more reflective of my first state after leaving Mormonism (ultra left after being ultra right):http://corvus.freeshell.org

Current blog - reflective of my recovery from recovery, and finally growing up:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Resignation from the FB group Uncensored LDS/Mormon Discussions

Today I resigned from the group Uncensored LDS/Mormon Discussions.

Why, might you ask?

Oh my god. The answer is so easy: Because the group has censorship!

Here's a copy of the letter I posted:

Ok I'm out of here. I returned to the Mormon pie for a while. Now it's time to leave I can see.

Previously I had mostly moved passed the need to constantly chat about the Mo church. Then I was invited to join this group. I was attracted by the "uncensored" label, and found some joy in being in a place which I thought was truly uncensored. An open forum. And so on.

My experience here was not fully pleasant. Personal attacks - once I questioned some people's dominant paradigms. Then having to block several people who either were directly offensive, piling on, and then as a defense to block a few others who looked to me like they probably were good candidates (because they probably wouldn't like hearing from the "other side" of a given issue as per their own profiles).

Many admins are still too "new exmo," or they've landed in a place where their whole being cannot easily tolerate criticisms of where they've landed.

I have no idea why I blocked one of the admins. But at the time I probably had a good reason. Maybe it's time to search for forums outside the scope of FB again. More anonymity. More freedom. Less control, in general. But mainly more freedom to speak.

FB does have a "blocking" feature. IMO it's generally an abuse to force people to refrain from blocking "all admins" on a given forum (especially when a given forum has many admins), if some of those admins are either a.) the attacking type, or b.) engage in admin-enabled pile ons, or c.) appear to be a person who probably would engage in an attack based on their own strong positions unyielding positions on a given issue.

Ok, so we'll see you on the flip side. Enough of the Mormon pie.

Recovery from Mormonism.

Recovery from the Exmormon Foundation.

Recovery from the Unitarian Universalists.

Recovery from the "PostMormon" coffee group.

Recovery from Atheists of Utah.

Recovery from naturalist & humanist groups who are religions unto themselves.

Recovery from a temporary wade back into the deep waters of Mormonism via this forum. Time to depart...

Don't stay too long w/recovery groups - for your own well being. Move on to greener pastures... That's my advise. I have. I need to remember that. Bye.
-----------------------

Anyway it's quite sad really. When Mormons leave the Mormon Church they easily retain their propensity to control & censor others. Is the reason for this that religion is a natural phenomenon? Perhaps. Perhaps it is simply natural to try to control other people. To try & force them to your own meme set's rules & ideals.

The "Uncensored LDS/Mormon Discussions" group is still hierarchical. Thus they MUST censor to maintain their hierarchy & leadership. Disrespect (or block for whatever reason) one of five admins, and you're out. That's censorship.

Also the group constantly chats about Mormon stuff. Really, I was mostly past the need to chat about Mormon minutia. I've got bigger fish to fry & better things to spend my time responding to. So really, it's perhaps a blessing in disguise that these ex-Mormons acted exactly like many ex-Mormons do: They act exactly like Mormons. So, time to move on past these people. And by the way, many other religions act like Mormons too. Heresy trials. Excommunication. Even liberal groups do this! That's why it's important to try & move beyond religion, where possible. To embrace fully free speech. Even free speech for those who hurt the feelings of others.

Honesty must take precedence.