My Journey to Conservatism

The Aristotelian-Ptolemaic model of the universe ended up being wrong:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

Galileo helped correct as did others.

Newton wasn't wrong, but his concepts didn't include Relativity nor Quantum Mechanics nor  Quantum field theory.

Jeffersonian Deism's clockwork universe with a Supreme Architect was the most reasonable one at the time, but in light of current observations such a stance can no longer be reasonably supported.

Questioning dominant paradigms is actually quite a useful activity. And questioning and sometimes lampooning sacred cows. It's essential.

Enlightenment Values are worth preserving. America is the best example of a country which exemplifies Enlightenment values.

Values not given by any god. But rather given by 13.8+ billion years of evolution by natural selection, and by our history & choices.

The religious right denies the facts of evolution, while living lives which are often in fact 'most true' to it.

The dogmatic de facto religious left claims to believe in evolution, while often living lives which are essentially traitorous to evolution.

"...Although the initial development of moral foundations theory focused on cultural differences, subsequent work with the theory has largely focused on political ideology. Various scholars have offered moral foundations theory as an explanation of differences among political progressives (liberals in the American sense), conservatives, and libertarians, and have suggested that it can explain variation in opinion on politically charged issues such as gay marriage and abortion. In particular, Haidt and fellow researchers have argued that progressives stress only two of the moral foundations (Care and Fairness) in their reasoning, and libertarians stress only two (Liberty and Fairness), while conservatives stress all six more equally."
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory

Religion is a natural phenomenon, a fact which cuts several ways. Yes it's another reason for the mystical claims to be debunked. But it also means that fully natural evolved human moral codes of conduct are often couched within religious contexts.

Dennett on religion being natural:
https://youtu.be/56VAZNx8HBQ

...a fact also mostly fully lost on all dogmatic leftist atheists who still have a chip on their should regarding being lied to in their former conservative religions.

Being wrong can be a virtue, if we're willing to change our minds upon new evidence.

Was born an atheist.

At age 5 learned there was a sky god. Seemed strange to me, but ok.

At age 9 learned I was a sexual animal. Whodathunkit.

At age 11 learned that the sky god was more than a bit upset at my being a sexual animal. The natural man, and 11 year old kid coming of age, is an enemy to god after all, right?

Between the ages of 19 and 21 I spent 2 years making maps on 3x5 cards, taking pictures of sunsets, and avoiding a proper admission that I was a normal sexual animal.

While at BYU at the age of 23 I started questioning the shaming the sky god likes to do regarding being a normal sexual animal.

While at Weber State I learned about physics and evolution. What I learned filled a hole left by my increasing rejection of the mysticism learned in my youth.

At age 26 I fully rejected the mysticism, and I resigned from the religion of my youth (Mormonism).

Between the ages of 13 and 23 I was a socially (religiously) conservative Democrat, because my father was a somewhat rare Democrat within a sea of Republicans within his religion.

At 26 I became more socially liberal, an ultra-liberal essentially. Drafted an exit journal.

In response to leaving an ultra-conservative religion, I switched to being an ultra-leftist socially.

Participated in a few nudist events, until I realized they were hypocritical.

Fully bought into Bruce Bagemihl's theory that because there's gay animals therefore gayness must be valued as a primary trail which is being selected for - which I now realize is completely & utterly wrong. Homosexuality is an outlier effect of the way sex gets set up in humans & in all animals which exhibit the treat. A side effect which is not being selected for. What's selected for is reproduction & survival, period. The machinery of biological evolution produces outliers. Doesn't meant the outliers have inherent value. Also doesn't mean they should be thrown off buildings, except for outright pedophiles and psychopaths.

Was a fat bastard living in my parent's basement. Developed cataracts. Had cataract surgery. No more thick glasses. Lost 110 pounds. Lived in Portland, Oregon for a year and a half. While in Portland visited a swingers event once. Didn't witness anything explicit & didn't participate. But I saw basically how they operate. And my assessment was that the way they organized themselves was strange & basically abusive.

After leaving Portland I married a socially conservative atheist from rural China with zero connection to the Book of Mormon, Bible, or Quran.

Took in via videos & lectures much of the work of the following people:

Christopher Hitchens
Richard Dawskins
Daniel Dennett
Steven Pinker
Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Events like 9/11 happened. The Denmark Mohamed cartoons & the stupid & crazy responses. Theo Van Gogh being killed after he released a film about how women in Islam are abused. The Charlie Hebdo massacre. The Garland, Texas Draw Mohamed contest which two Islamic people tried to shoot up.

I examined the response of the left, of the Democrat part of my father, of all the stations & people who liked & listened to & would have listened to. As an ex-Mormon, I examined who exactly supported drawing Mohamed. Who supports ex-Muslims? Who supports Muslims leaving Islam? It's not he left. It's not the Democrats. So, I realized I was wrong, about politics.

My socially conservative atheist wife helped me question the socially leftist paradigm I had bought into as an ex-Mormon with a chip on his shoulder about the lies of Mormonism. Daniel Dennett's talks about religion being a natural phenomenon helped also. Plus I had years of experience of engaging in first hand observational de facto studies of what the left has to offer socially. The nhilism of narcissism of gay culture. What being 'childfree' really means: slow motion suicide. That the left is in denial regarding the roots of homosexuality. And when I told an atheist group in Salt Lake that I liked Duck Dynasty, they booted me in a worse way than I ever experienced when leaving Mormonism. A very religious way of booting.

The children of breeders will inherit the Earth. The 'childfree' will not, and neither will the non-breeding gays.

In the past I used to hate Ayn Rand. Now I'm willing to check out some of her ideas, because mostly *only* libertarians support drawing Mohamed nowadays, and a very few lonely leftists who're mostly in denial regarding how the left has left them behind.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, really was a eugenicist. And Christopher Hitchens has rightly pointed out that the unborn do have some rights. The left is wrong about these points also.

While a member of another leftist atheist group, Salt Lake Valley Atheists (now defunct), I observed how they kicked out of their midst a pro-life atheist woman. That experiencing was eye opening for me. Prior to that I thought that atheism equaled skepticism & reason. Now I realize it doesn't, not automatically. Leftist atheism is just another f-ing religion, a cult.

So I'm in recovery from leftistism, politically & socially.

The conservatism I embrace is not that of Glenn Beck, nor of establishment Republicans. I reject religios conservatism which seeks to shame people for masturbation & oral sex & an appreciation of art which falls into the nude and erotic spheres. There is no god who gets upset when gay people meet up. But, from an evolutionary perspective, they'd probably be happier if they lived straight lives.

Heresy, heresy, heresy, for your average leftist atheist who is just so upset with the conservative religions of their youths & etc.

Not throwing out the baby of good evolved highly valuable human values with the bath water of mysticism is a very hard task. Most just assume that 'without god everything is permitted.' But it's not. Not because there's no god, but because we're highly complex evolved moral animals. Evolved moral codes act as counter weights to also evolved proclivities which can lead to destructive dead ends.

Current people on my appreciation list:

Trump - what swayed me to his side after some initial skepticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiA0P9iELAA
(Milo Y talking with Rubin)

Christopher Hitchens - provided initial key skepticism regarding the Clintons, and regarding some leftist doctrinal tenants. No one left to Lie To, book info.

Daniel Dennett - a much better philosopher than Sam Harris (Harris is I realize now, a myopic hack)

Steven Pinker - debunked the 'blank slate' concepts of social constructivists. Related videos, longer part 1, part 2. And a Ted talk.

Bosch Fawstin - an ex-Muslim who won the Draw Mohamed cartoon contest in Garland, Texas. Talk to Children of Jewish Holocaust Survival. Cartoon contest talk.

Mark Steyn - skepticism regarding the 'hockey stick' concept regarding climate change. Very honest regarding the facts & impacts of Islam.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali - an ex-Muslim truth teller. Colleague of Theo Van Gogh who got killed as noted above. She needs round the clock security, and in America only a conservative think tank would help pay for that security. Leftists consider her to be racist & bigoted - so this is a key reason also why I'm no longer a leftist.

All Enlightenment thinkers, and the Enlightenment-based founders of America.

Roger Stone - a long time truth teller who I've newly found

Dinesh D'Souza - a debate partner with Hitchens. Hitchens told the truth about the Clintons, and Dinesh has a great movie about the issue now. Dinesh may be wrong about whether a god exists, but he's right about the impacts of leftist atheism (very negative nhilistic impacts).

Rush - a valuable truth teller who for too long I discounted & hated. He was right all along. I was wrong for many years.

Sean Hannity - a guy with 20 years of real work experience who hasn't forgotten what it's like to be a regular working Joe. Truth teller.

Milo Yiannopoulos - a brash conservative gay Brit who helped me see the high utilitarian value to a Trump presidency.

Doug Mainwaring - a guy who came to his sanity and returned to be with & support his straight family, AKA his family. My uncle wasn't so lucky, and was a victim of the ultra-right and the ultra-left.

Added August 2017:

Jordan B. Peterson - great info on the problems of neomarxist postmodernism.

Gad Saad - great evolutionary behavior scientist.

---

Related posts:

Lies present in conservative religion force children into the abusive arms of the denialist myopic left.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2016/02/lies-present-in-conservative-religion.html

Where does social conservatism come from? From human nature.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/11/where-does-social-conservatism-come.html

Humans are not Bonobos - Response to Darrel Ray and his brand of so-called Secular Sexuality - Commentary about abusive leftist confusion regarding human nature, and the evolutionary roots and benefits of some degree of sexual shame.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/10/humans-are-not-bonobos-response-to.html

Lives and families are destroyed by Tranny and Gay acceptance and promotion - LGBT abusive outliers are not equal
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/07/lives-and-families-are-destroyed-by.html

Homosexuality occurs in nature? So what. Can I be a "black atheist" too?
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/08/homosexuality-occurrs-in-nature-so-what.html

On American exceptionalism: the left's hatred of America
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/on-american-exceptionalism-left-hatred.html

Thank God for the Crusades - speaking as an atheist
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/thank-god-for-crusades-speaking-as.html

And the worst of these is Islam: Foolish bleeding hearts helped birth Islamic State
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/and-worst-of-these-is-islam-foolish.html

Naked women protesting: The EXACT response needed, to Islam in general, Islamic State, and censors of Charlie Hebdo cartoons.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/naked-women-protesting-exact-response.html

Comments in response to the general Mormon stance on marriage
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/comments-in-response-to-general-mormon.html

Latest thoughts on the pressing issues of the day
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/02/latest-thoughts-on-pressing-issues-of.html

Leftist religion loves Islam and hates the West and the fruits of the Enlightenment
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/01/leftist-religion-loves-islam-and-hates.html

The Atheist Movement needs move laxative - Making room for social & political conservatives!
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-atheist-movement-needs-move.html

John Harvey Kellogg: what a fucker. Masturbation prevention is evil.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/10/john-harvey-kellogg-what-fucker.html

response to Rory Patrick's 100 day masturbation abstinence - the pain and sorrow of having genitals
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/10/response-to-rory-patricks-100-day.html

Balkan Erotic Epic - part of the set of short films in Destricted - commentary & review
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/10/balkan-erotic-epic-part-of-set-of-short.html

Liberal anger at being human - Criticisms of California Senate Bill SB 967
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/10/liberal-anger-at-being-human-criticisms.html

whitewashing history -- sex obsessed ancestors -- nudist hypocrisy
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/09/whitewashing-history-sex-obsessed.html

Are Mormonism & Catholicism homosexual & pedophile generators?
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

Questions for Mormon Missionaries - God, Sex, and honesty | 16 questions for Mormon Missionaries
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/03/questions-for-mormon-missionaries-god.html

Repackaged bullshit: Porn The New Tobacco | Jack Fischer | TEDxBinghamtonUniversity
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/08/repackaged-bullshit-porn-new-tobacco.html

The best part of social conservatism advocates for family & life & children & what leftists derisively call 'breeding.'

Breeders will inherit the Earth. Problems with "recovery" from religion
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/06/breeders-will-inherit-earth-problems.html

Really the children of breeders will inherit the Earth.

The worst part of religious-based 'conservatism' comes from religions which use fear & shame to teach children & adults to hate the evolved sexual systems in their bodies. But this 'conservatism' doesn't conserve anything. It just tends to churn out destructive ultra-right and ultra-left abusive extremists. The ultra-right religionists who stay in their religions & who continue teaching their children to hate their bodies & the fact that we're sexual animals. And the children who reflexively rebel, turning into non-reproductive outliers & 'childfree' wastrels.

Liberals have a strange alliance with ultra-right religious 'conservatives.' Leftists hate human nature just as much as the ultra-right religionists seems to. The combined human-nature-hating team consists of: Islam people, some Mormons, some Catholics, and leftists who a.) love Islam, and b.) hate the fact that human males are evolved to enjoy good looking women - and who hate 1.2 billion years of evolutionary sexual history just as much as the ultra-right religionists do. Leftists also hate the fact that humans are sexually dimorphic, and they actively ignore that we're not 'blank slates,' as Steven Pinker has commented on.

I'm for good women and men who put family & children first.

I'm proudly voting for Trump. He's my kind of Republican. Not a highly shaming human-nature-hating right-wing religionist, nor a human-nature-hating leftist.

Conserving through truth telling. Conserving through advocacy for family. Conversing through de facto advocacy that the Western Enlightenment continue - which also means conserving and protecting America & traditional American values.

Perhaps where I'm at is a socially moderate / conservative / pragmatic libertarian. But I strongly maintain that pot does rot your brain. And I don't dogmatically follow all libertarian principles. Libertarianism can be a de facto religion too, and I don't wish to join any religions.

I probably aspire to the conservatism Jonathan Haidt mentions, with more equal alliance to Care, Fairness, Liberty, Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity. The Sanctity of life, not the Sanctity of sacred cows. Loyalty to the Enlightenment and Enlightenment principles. The Authority of the Rule of Law. Care, but not through the Dole because the Dole helps no one mostly. Fairness, but not 'social justice.' Fairness through a fairness of opportunity - but not opportunity at the cost of group rights hierarchies nor identity politics.

Charlie Hebdo rest in peace (RIP): Not all gods are equal, some are peaceful and some are terrorists

Copy of the January 2016 "Charlie Hebdo" The god of all religions a terrorist? I don't think so. Not all religions have the same god.

The original & only Charlie Hebdo rest in peace. The new Hebdo is not the same magazine as the old one. RIP Charlie Hebdo. Not all gods are equal nor are all religions. "Religion" as a concept is just as dangerous a thing when it flowers on the left as when it continues to exist on the right, and probably the leftist version is even more dangerous & denialist & dishonest.

[Charlie Hebdo’s anniversary edition proves Islamic terrorists won]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiFl7eo4nBw

Charlie Hebdo claims that the "god of all religions is a terrorist" as per a recent cover talked about in the video below. That's not true though.

The god the Jains is not a terrorist. The god of most Amish is not. Even the hippie god of leftie Christians/Unitarians is not (except in as much as that god says one must law down and let fascists thrive "in their own lands").

The god of Mormonism is a horny white & delightsome man who has sex with thousands of women every hour of every day [do the math: to make 10,000,000,000 spirit babies in say 1,000,000 years, that's 1 baby making activity even every hour].

The god of Scientology is an angry alien.

The god of Catholicism & Anglicanism is a mystical undefinable asexual parthenogenic blob, and in the case of Catholocism who really really hates making Jesuses via normal vaginal sex while at the same time really really liking perverted old fart virgin pedophile priests.

The god of Islam is vain & brutal & narcissistic & jealous & mean & evil. Check the links at:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/

Not all gods are equal nor are all religions.

--------

Related posts & additional notes:

On the god of Mormonism:

Advise for TBMs on porn: Why society accepts pornography but not littering?
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/advise-for-tbms-on-porn-why-society.html

We were all just sperm in god's balls:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/god's%20balls

Questions for Mormon missionaries (includes references to how the Mormon god had literal sex with Mary the mother of Jesus)
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/03/questions-for-mormon-missionaries-god.html

On the god of Catholicism (defined by a bunch of fucking mumbo jumbo):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Concept_of_the_Divine#Essence_and_attributes
and unlike Mormonism Catholicism firmly maintains the birth of Jesus was virginal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus
God's wiener did not go anywhere near Mary's hoohaw, and in Catholicism God probably doesn't even have a wiener & to suggest as much would be sacrilege to Catholics.

On the god of Islam: the core text of Islam clearly states his intentions:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/
...on that page check out the following categories:

Injustice
Intolerance
Cruelty and Violence
Absurdities
Good Stuff
Women
Science and History
Contradictions
Interpretations
Family Values
Sex
Language

Whereas the god of Jainism is much different:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism#God

Five main vows of Jains, which is a much different list from that of your average Mohamed lover:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism#Five_main_vows

Jains must be non-violence, but sometimes violence is called for:
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/iraq

God of Scientology:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4SBfhRmvzU
and http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x21d8ks_south-park-what-scientologist-actually-believe_fun

Lives and families are destroyed by Tranny and Gay acceptance and promotion - LGBT abusive outliers are not equal

Tranny culture RUINS lives and families
LGBT outliers are not equal

 (YouTube banned this video four years after it was posted, so I put it on BitChute. Hey Google & Youtube: Fuck you.)

  


Youtube banned link:  Tranny culture RUINS lives and families - LGBT outliers are not equal

https://youtu.be/YWPnt9-Urzk

Start with 8 (children), as an ultra-hard-line Mormon family.

Later 3 get sucked into a man-hating crazy-woman-led cult. The 3 all change their last names to that of the cult leader (the Cropper cult of Logan, Utah). 1 of the 3 Cropper cult converts later decides he's gay, while still working at BYU.

More recently 1 of the 8 decides to "change" from a man to a woman (not a Cropper cult 3, but another of the 8), leaving his children homeless and a broken home.

1 commits suicide (also separate from the 3 Cropper cult ones - probably because of irritable bowel syndrome in part, and who knows why else).

What are the causes? Why all this chaos in an ultra-right ultra-hard-line Mormon family?

Here's some theories:

A. Too much cheap ground beef as a child, and too much rice and beans? Cheapy poor-person possibly-third-world style nutrition as children, for all 8.

B. Parents too strict ultra Mormon. Father very angry and sometimes violent. Mother extreme passive aggressive my way or the highway type person re being a strict Mormon.

C. Related past thoughts:

Are Mormonism & Catholicism homosexual & pedophile generators? | Connections between homosexuality & pedophilia
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

D. An omnipresent abusive leftist permissive culture which claims "anything goes," when it doesn't?

Related thoughts:

Advice for Social Conservatives & Moderates, from a Family Values Atheist
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/advice-for-social-conservatives.html

Embracing true honest naturalism: Marriage is about children
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/embracing-true-honest-naturalism.html

E. Ultra-rightist cults can spawn new sub-cults. A woman named Cropper in Logan, Utah started.a sub-cult branched from ultra Mormonism. She hates men and does laying on of hands, and has visions where she tell her adherents that all men are evil.

Three of my brother's children were sucked into this strange sub-cult in Logan. They all changed their last names to Cropper, and they now have zero contact with my brother or anyone in my "normal" regular family.

F. Ultra-right religion can cause a worse abuse when a child or adult rebels and becomes a permissive relativist ultra leftist.

See item C for more details.

G. Memetic diseases of the left can at times be more abusive and destructive than those of the right.

Families and lives are destroyed by leftist meme sets.

H. To have all this chaos, my ultra extreme angry passive and non-passive aggressive (sometimes violent) brother and his wife have set up a meat grinder somehow. Many of their children have been fucked up and damaged by the "my way or the highway" type of upbringing.

But on the other hand permissive relativist liberalism is also a meat grinder.

In the past I had a gay uncle who turned his back on his straight family, and he died of AIDS as a result. He was a victim of both the extreme right and the extreme left.

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

So with the latest news that one nephew of mine just destroyed his family because he's chosen to "change" his sex: this man IS a fucking victim of moronic leftist culture which claims that whatever damn fool thing pops into your head should be acted upon.

A marriage and family, destroyed.

Two wonderful little girls, ages 4 and 1, out on the street.

Permissive gay and tranny accepting leftist culture IS to blame for this! But so are his  my way or the highway parents, AS IS anti-heathy-sex Mormonism.

Related thoughts:
Jesus wants me for an asshole: the song of LDS missionaries, bishops, and prophets
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/03/jesus-wants-me-for-asshole-song-of-lds.html

Open ended acceptance of all things ，LGBT results in the destruction of lives! Bruce Jenner for example is a moron who's also a victim of permissive leftistism.

My uncle who jumped from ultra conservative Manti, Utah style Mormonism  to San Francisco put your John Thomas in a glory hole liberalism was a fool and a victim of both the left and the right.

My longer standing pedophile-friend-accepting gay nephew is s victim of the anti-masturbation anti-positive sex Mormonism, AND permissive leftistism.

My newly transgender nephew and his children and his now destroyed family are victims of the meat grinder nature of his patents' ultra conservative strict angry violent Mormonism, and also of permissive relativist leftistism.

Lives are destroyed by ultra rightism and ultra leftistism. A ping pong game that grinds people down to dust.

------

Additional:

'Where does social conservatism come from? From human nature.'
https://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2015/11/where-does-social-conservatism-come.html

'Embracing true honest naturalism: Marriage is about children'
https://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/embracing-true-honest-naturalism.html

'Banned from a conservative atheists facebook group: conservatives who aren't conservative.'
https://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2017/08/banned-from-conservative-atheists.html

Embracing true honest naturalism: Marriage is about children

Here's a copy of a forum exchange, regarding a post I found from the group Seculars Against Same Sex "Marriage:"

My post:

Marriage is about children. I agree with that... Also children may well need a mommy & a daddy. Sounds good to me. 13.8 billion years. So far so good. Compared to ~20 years of denialism and knocking on the sperm bank door.

Quotes from where I found the link:

----quotes begin

Paddy Manning, who is same-sex attracted and against same-sex “marriage,” debates and explains why he opposes it:

----

*5:30-8:01 “Marriage is a uniquely child-centered institution. It is the only place in our society where children can be created, reared, and socialized; and the institution exists for that. If we move to a status where we have a one-size fits all marriage (institution), we part the idea of children and having children from marriage. After that the state gets to decide what your relationship is with the child. Natural parents never require that decision.

-----

*Let’s be clear, nobody is blanket opposing same-sex adoption. What we want is the recognition that a child has a right PRIMARILY to a mother and father...Do u want to enshrine in law the accidental?

----

*You don’t like the idea that children might have a right to a mother and father; which they do. PRIMARILY the law should recognize that. Everything else comes after that.

-----

*In response to the elderly couples who get married past child-bearing age: “It doesn’t affect the institution."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h6yX4dY1Qs

----end of quote

In response to posting the above I received the following response:

But this only works if every single person has the goal of making sure that life goes on in the same way it has for 13.8 billion years, as you say. "...that a child has a right PRIMARILY to a mother and father..." is a statement that just goes along with that same theory. All Children have the right to proper nutrition as well, but plenty of kids have died from malnutrition for 13.8 billion years. Only recently has the world tried to stop that. But maybe we are messing with something that was working just for for billions of years. Should we let the kids be? All I am saying is that change is okay, even if that changes the course. We have no inherent responsibility to stay the course.

==============

And here is my reply to the above paragraph:

Hi.

You wrote:

<clip>
>if every single person

Humans have built in traits which come from nature, evolution by natural selection, genetics and memetics.

The traits babies are born with fall onto a bell curve graph.

Outlier traits are less common. More common traits tend to increase genetic/memetic frequency.

Humans are animals, just as much animals as are salmon that swim up stream, birds that sing, and we share a common ancestor with chimps and bonobos. Humans are not bonobos, nor are we chimps, but our nature appears to like both in between and beyond.

>has the goal

The goals of humans come from a combination of genetics & memetics.

>of making sure that life

Most humans within the larger set of more common traits tends to value the continuance of life. If this were not the case, humans would go extinct.

>13.8 billion years

It took ~13.8 billion years for you and I to be here today. The so-called big-bang. Stars living, then exploding. The exploded star matter reforming into new stars & solar systems & galaxies.

A very long process indeed.

>a child has a right

Children generally have several key rights. A right to life is one. I argue that it's fully reasonable, and naturalistic, and human, to just assume, by default, that children need a mommy and a daddy. Plus my own observation of outlier-groups who wish to claim the right to raise children, my observations have yielded direct evidence which I'm generally satisfied with, which show to me that outlier-trait-human-culture, such as it is, is not a particularly healthy environment for children. Also, there are the basic needs of a child, who, more commonly, would be born with the more common trait of being straight. Within that context, a child's "straightness" would be most valued within a house who's parents also fall within the general more-common-trait set. Also, the basic healthy brain & psychological development of human children may well require, ideally, the presence of a male & female in a house - both sexes, not just one or the other, ideally.

So there's several needs & issues at play. What do children have a right to. What does the human animal, in the form of growing children, really need.

When it comes to the current situation, there is incredible pressure to not be honest on these points - not in the secular community.

The so-called secular community is so very angry at being lied to about the presence of a god, and about the bad aspects of religion, they have come to incorrectly include that all allowable answers must oppose what religious people may advocate for.

So, regarding physics, cosmology, and basic biology, yes on those topics your average scientists has no issues with being more objective. However, when it comes to social issues, the left-leaning scientists will introduce confirmation bias, and denialism, into his or her interpretations of evidence, what questions to ask, what studies to do, what conclusions to draw, and so on.

For many years the so-called "right" denied human nature, or connection to other animals, and so on.

Now, today, the left also denies human nature, the fact that religion is a natural phenomenon cuts both ways - in that fully natural human morality, morality which can otherwise protect us from dangerous outlier behavior, is fully rooted within middle & right religion.

Confirmation bias can also be seen in the study of anthropology. Yes, the 60s era hippie scientists/anthropologists go to visit tribes who happen to agree with their hippie views on life. But what about the "aboriginal tribes" who created the Bible? What about the "aboriginal tribes" who live in rural China - people who've had zero contact with the Bible or the Torah? What do they advocate for? What do they think?

Honesty about why people do the things they do. That's what we need more of.

The religious may well have their religion because it helps them better survive. Some lies, and a lot of truths, all mixed together - helping humanity survive.

Rip out one part, tear a person away from their religion, and they can go right off the cliff! Yes, this is quite true.

I've personally gone on an Alice in Wonderland Style Journey. Gathering data over several years. Seeing what different groups do. Nudists. Polys. Sex party people. Gay house parties & bars (via my gay nephew). Making note of what happened with an uncle who grew up in Manti, but who fell prey to what happens when you jump to the extreme opposite side.

In the case of Atheists of Utah, they celibate the fact that they were nominated by Q Salt Lake to be the best religion, and a runner up for the best social group. Parties centered around raffling off wheelbarrows full of booze. They see themselves as the key answer to Mormonism!

Where does such a generalized status leave humans born into the more-common less-of-an-outlier set of naturally I-want-to-reproduce set? The set that helps keep humanity alive?

Saying "there's plenty of other people who breed, why do I need to?" is an incredibly crass & nihilistic & abusive way of looking at the world, and at your own life. People who say this are frankly victims of a slow-motion-suicide destructive meme set on the left.

So there's several issues at play here.

Societies can become ill, sick, defective. Honesty is one way to fix problems. And for me, listening to people like Steven Pinker, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, plus also listening to what the middle & right say - really listening & trying to understand why they say the things they do, plus also having a direct connection to Chinese-aboriginal-culture which states that non-outlier naturally-reproductive human culture & activity is more valuable than forcibly embracing outlier activity like the left does in America & Europe.

So, tearing someone away from their religion can screw up their life, or even kill them. It can cause them to lead a petty dead end life. And I say this fully realizing that religions also can destroy & grind down people. What's the cure? More honesty on all sides. The type of honesty that realizes that yes, very damn good parts of human morality & nature, the parts which help us avoid destructive behaviors & protect us from outliers, do fully & naturally reside within religions. The type of honesty that recognizes abuse where it's present, on all sides. Honesty about there being no god, the fact of evolution, and the lack of divinity of scripture. But also honesty that fully natural & useful human nature came up with some pretty damn good rules to help protect us.

Humans, writing things down, for very human reasons. Some of the things they wrote down do help people survive & thrive. Embrace those things. And try to reject the more destructive things.

>plenty of kids have died from malnutrition

What is the most common desire of parents in this regard? To help their children live. What does a healthy society advocate in this regard? To ensure that all children get enough food. What do other animals advocate for in this regard? The same.

>Only recently has the world tried to stop that.

Hardly.

See above.

>maybe we are messing

Yes, we are "messing." Denying our history. Denying our nature. Denying what may well be the most-healthy nature of our kids. Denying what kids may well need. Denying the abuse that happens, very commonly, today in outlier sets. Denying our place on the great mandala - the tapestry of life that we can either choose to be a part of, or not. I advocate that we choose life.

>Should we let the kids be?

"Letting them 'be'" would mean letting them grow up in a traditional long standing history most natural most common household, for their own good (for many reasons, including their own needs, plus the more common directly observed problems with outlier 'culture').

Fucking with them, would mean forcing them to grow up in a two mommy household where one mommy had to knock on a sperm bank door, and having no father in the house. Plus not helping a straight child growing up in a house which values & honors & promotes straightness (eg: the most common productive, more-healthy, set).

>We have no inherent responsibility to stay the course.

Responsibility comes from several sources. Being true to ourselves. Getting along in a community. Helping ensure that other people don't go off a cliff.

Sex, in the more common set, is wisely selfish. Even an Randian objectivist could appreciate that (even though Ayn Rand was a complete know-nothing idiot). If we AREN'T sucked in, by nature, to reproduction, we may well, and can easily, lead a petty & dead end life.

So, why are Catholics concerned about birth control?

Why does sperm bank use by single women & lesbians cause people to be concerned?

Why do people get concerned about homosexuality, pedophilia, zoophilia, sociopathy, psychopathy, schizophrenia, and other outlier-traits? Why do most all human cultures have rules & recommendations & concerns about these outlier traits which some people are either sucked into, or born into?

We don't want to see people go off a cliff.

Discounting the rules & prescriptions & suggestions of the religious, just because their god may not exist, is far far too simplistic - and is usually a completely wrong evaluation of what is actually happening.

So, honoring our history. Honoring & supporting life. Remembering that it may be dangerous to stray too far from our natural path. And remembering that, damn it, even the fucking right is "right" on some things. Damn, that's hard to admit, but it's true.

==============

Further response received on 5-29:

Seculars against same sex marriage. That is pretty ironic. I don't think they actually have any good arguments... but that is just me.

I doubt they have that big of a group.... most secular people are for equal rights of gays.

This idea that children deserve a biological mother and father to best succeed is not proven.

If it were, you would still have to deal with single parents, grandparents, foster parents, etc....

So if you oppose gay marriage, do you oppose these OTHER things as well?

My response:

Points raised & my responses:

Point 1: Most people believe in X.

Response:

Argumentum ad populum.

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

"...In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it."

2. Ironic.

Response:

There's many ironies to life.

Explore some: http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/

3. What about equal rights?

Response:

Equal rights should be given when equality is deserved, warranted, healthy, safe, valuable, and applicable.

The right to civilly unite? Ok. Whatever.

The right to use the "marriage" term, which implies access to children, not so sure.

Doesn't matter how many naive judges are convinced, or the number of naive liberals jumping on board like lemmings.

I've acquired enough experiential knowledge & expertise on the subject at hand to change my position - change from the oh-so-predictable position of the naive left, to one more in the center or right, on this issue.

Leftists are naive about many things.

Leftists run the Salt Lake City Library.

Muslim Journeys:
http://www.slcpl.org/events/view/2945/
and this fool:
http://www.slcpl.lib.ut.us/events/view/1965/

A response to the leftist love of Tariq Ramadan:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2007/09/islamism_goes_mainstream.html

The primary Muslim journey that comes to my mind is when several adherents flew planes into buildings on 9/11. That is the preeminent "Muslim Journey" of our age.

Also, Mohamed was not an advocate for social justice.
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-new-creed-of-unitarian-universalism.html

Come to find out liberals are naive about gays as well.

Knee jerk liberals. Yes, Mr. & Mrs. Conservative, I'm starting to understand now. And I say that as a guy who's for single payer and who fully maintains that Ayn Rand was a complete & utter fool.

From Jesse Bering: "...Even in societies where homosexuality was tolerated, such as in Ancient Greece, men tended to engage in pederasty with adolescent boys while maintaining wives and families at home..."

from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2011/08/01/the-end-of-gays-gay-marriage-and-the-decline-of-the-homosexual-population/

Yet another connection between homosexuality & pedophilia. My goodness. Not so good of an environment for kids.

Are Mormonism & Catholicism homosexual & pedophile generators? | Connections between homosexuality & pedophilia
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/are-mormonism-catholicism-homosexual_24.html

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/pedophilia
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/homosexuality

Also Bering has written the book "Perv: The Sexual Deviant in All of Us."

I guess he'd know, as per even his direct stated connection between homos and pedos (my apologies to liberal sensibility for using the short word homo, but it seemed apt given what's being discussed) listed above - and since he's a homosexual.

Don't fuck animals. Hey, the Bible was right! Don't put your dick in an asshole! Damn, how'd they figure that one out?

Even non-Biblical cultures have figured these key truths out. Why is your average liberal in denial?

4. Noted annoyance at discovering that there are "seculars against same sex marriage."

Response:

Bursting the bubble of the liberal meme set is unpleasant also, for the liberal.

"There's people who disagree." Hmmm. Honest scientists may not be surprised. But "skeptics," no, they should never be presented with evidence counter to their suppositions.

5. Children deserve a mother & father, ideally is not proven.

Response:

The left cannot be trusted to provide an unbiased response on the matter.

Hey, maybe a kid ideally needs a mommy & a daddy. Damn, that's a hard one. We need to go to the lab to study that one.

Lame retrograde denialism.

The simplest, & most healthy, ideas from religion, discounted too soon & too quickly by your average secularist.

Do we need to prove that children need air? Water? Food?

How departed from our natural history, examining what all cultures do & advocate for, and what all people think on the matter, do we have to be?

I'm skeptical of anything but the default position: male & female raising children, for several reasons. One reason is what the child may need. Another reason is what I've observed first hand - observed things which most secularists / liberals have not observed.

Even if we want to test: It is unethical to "test," even though de facto tests are going on right now. I have a cousin lesbian conducting such a test right now. The daughter of my uncle from Manti who died of AIDS. Of course she turned gay. No problem there.

updated religious and political views... an atheist moderate / conservative
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2013/08/updated-religious-and-political-views.html

We can gather relevant evidence by a.) examining our own long standing natural history, and b.) examining what all cultures do in this regard - not just the ones that happen to agree with the leftist relativist hippie position, and c.) examining what other animals do, and d.) asking the children of gays what they think, and e.) making note of the probably-inherantly-abusive nature of "gay" culture.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/not-all-children-raised-by-gay-parents-support-gay-marriage-i-should-know-i/

A very high level of skepticism regarding anything but the default natural position. Gathering evidence from all sides & all tribes. Personal experiential evidence. All this has led me to conclude that children need a mommy & a daddy, and should not be placed in gay, nor single parent, households, period.

6. Single parents.

Less than ideal situation. Most everyone agrees with this.

Grandparents. At least it's usually a male & female, and they're grandparents after all.

Foster parents. Male & female.

7. If you oppose gay marriage, do you oppose these OTHER things as well?

Response: I'm highly skeptical of gay "marriage," based on first hand experiential knowledge of gay culture, plus what I've learned from others about the issue, plus what I know about biology & evolutionary history.

I oppose any use of sperm banks, except for male & female couples.

I believe abortion after viability should be illegal, and before viability discouraged.

I believe birth control should be legal, but discouraged.

I believe that the entirety of liberalism is, in part, a death cult - engaging in advocacy for slow motion suicide for everyone.

I have observed that liberals are denialists about human nature & natural history just as much as conservatives have been.

8. Do you also oppose people that cannot have children getting married? Why not?

Response: Adoption is ok, with a male & female adopting.

I oppose single female, lesbian couple, and gay male couple, use of the sperm bank or adoption.

The courts have decided trivially that tomatoes are vegetables.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/12/26/256586055/when-the-supreme-court-decided-tomatoes-were-vegetables

Putting on robes and being a pompous know-it-all doesn't mean you know anything.

The destructive memetic infection has reached conservatives & libertarians, passed on to them from persistent liberals.

Denial of human nature. Ignoring our natural history. Toying with the lives of children. Ignoring huge problems with gay "culture."

What are the facts? What do people observe? Do you listen to what they say? What do cultures do who don't agree with your suppositions? Do we want to toy with the lives of children?

It's not my fault that atheism does not imply skepticism, and that skepticism does not imply free thought, and that free thought does not imply honesty - when it comes to groups who use these words as part of their names.

I'm not a libertarian, but Shermer has a point:

Michael Shermer on confirmation bias, on the left:
http://www.michaelshermer.com/tag/confirmation-bias/

The Political Brain
A recent brain-imaging study shows that our political predilections are a product of unconscious confirmation bias
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-political-brain/

People are born dumbshits. That's why god invented Christopher Hitchens, Steven Pinker, and Daniel Dennett. All of those dudes may be more accepting of so-called gay, butt fuck, marriage than I am. But I've gathered more direct data than probably ALL of them combined  -  except for Hitchens possibly.

In any case I'm satisfied & generally happy with my transition to the skeptical-of-gay-marriage-and-adoption meme set / camp. And I have one advantage that many others do not: I've already been through the pain of leaving an abusive meme set (eg: Mormonism). Thus social cajoling, pressure, and attacks are far less able to affect me.

I'm interested in the truth and in honesty, even if that means that my previous liberal suppositions are overturned in part.