Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Where Have All the Real Friends Gone?

I'm really getting sick and tired of fake people. You know at least one of those people, right? The one everyone talks about behind their back. The one that comes home from an uneventful weekend skiing and is dead set on regaling you about how he saved polar bear from certain doom, rescuing him from the path of a falling tree, all the while maintaining perfect skiing form. In addition, he was commended for his bravery in a local paper, slept with six chicks or dudes, and was offered a spot on the Olympic ski team. THAT guy. Well, you know what? Fuck that guy! We KNOW you're lying. If it weren't for the mild amusement we get from trying to figure out what you'll say next, we'd be done with you ages ago. I want to know and respect the person that you really are. Your flaws and shortcomings are part of that person. Come on people, let's get real.

Oh and I have another problem. Apparently I'm a problem magnate. Yup. What's that you ask? Ha! Well, it came to my attention a couple of hours ago that just about everyone I'm friends with from high school has, has had, or seeming wants to have some sort of catastrophic emotional or mental problem. And quite frankly, I've had enough. I don't care about whether your mom still loves you. I don't care if your boyfriend isn't a good listener. I don't care if your dog won't stop taking a crap on the living room carpet and your dad's one shit away from shoving his scrawny little neck down the garbage disposal. I just DON'T CARE! Enough with this bull shit. Don't you think I've got enough problems of my own to not want to hear about yours at six o'clock in the morning? Get over yourself. YOU ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT! And neither are your problems.

You know what I'd love? I'd love to meet someone, anyone who actually has a firm, self-confident grip on reality. Is that too much to ask? I just want to know someone who isn't going to add a whole avalanche of personal baggage onto my shoulders every time we hang out, someone who can hold their own in the world. For future reference, if you're not real, fuck off I don't want to meet you. I've got enough to worry about. Is it really that rare to find someone optimistic enough about life to realize that all our problems aren't worth a hill of beans? Seriously, I think I might know 1 maybe 2 people who actually get it, 1 or maybe 2 people that I can talk about anything too and not have to worry about how they're going to react, 1 or 2 people who are emotionally and mentally mature enough to stay cool under pressure and ask for help when needed. I guess what I'm trying to say is that they are the kind of person who realizes that the world doesn't revolve around them and that are open minded enough to try to see things from another point of view and at the same time respect that point of view regardless of whether or not they agree with it. All the rest, fuck 'em. Let me figure my shit out, then let them come talk to me about their mind-warping little issues. But, please guys, one at a fucking time!

Drawing off the last tidbit: Is is cool to have problems all of the sudden? I don't know, but I'd sure like to find out for sure, because I think I epitomize cool in that regard. It's not really that people have problems which annoys me though. No, it's the kinds of problems. I figure that some people just make mountains out of molehills because they ran out of this months supply of problems on the third day. Now if you've got some real problems you want to complain about, or something else that I can relate to, hell yeah, bring it on. It's healthy to vent now and then. Ever catch yourself making up stuff to make your bad shake sound worse? That's the kind of person I'd like to avoid.

I guess what I'm saying all along is all that I want is a little honesty and a little consideration. If you're my best friend then sure I want to try to help even if the problem is small, if anything to get you to relax a little. It's the acquaintances of mine that I don't want heaping their problems in my direction. And if I don't know you... oh you'd better stay the hell away from me with your baseball injuries and dog with a bladder infection, because I don't want to hear it. I don't like you; I don't want to talk to you; and for fuck's sake I don't care about your mom's sore tits.

So, I've decided I'm going to be more honest. If I don't want to hear about it, I'll tell you. If I'm willing to help; I'll try my best. But if you're not real with me, you're just wasting my time.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Predestination: Fact or Fiction

I would now like to tackle a rather heavily contested question. Are our lives predetermined? And, as with most difficult and highly debated questions, there is a simple and even obvious answer. If there are an infinite number of choices in life then predestination cannot exist.

We must ask if there is predestination, who knows about it? That is, if our lives are predetermined, someone or something must by definition hold that information.

Let's take the religious side first. That is, if we are predestined, then someone or something must know the outcome, otherwise we aren't predestined. There are those who say that God (I'm going to overlook this one) is devoid of time and therefore sees all that will happen. I have to contest however that evidence in the Bible proves this otherwise. God does seem surprised by human action quite frequently. You'd figure he'd have seen it from the beginning and not been too crushed when Adam ate the apple...

Anywho... onto (slightly) more logical arguments... "God" created man in "His image" but gave him free will. Does this mean that God does not have free will? Can God choose to be bad? Or is the very definition of bad determined based around what God doesn't do? (Talk about a sweet deal.) Regardless, I do think we have a consensus that man does err, even if made in "God's image". Therefore, it is possible for man to make mistakes in judgement.

Some are going to say that this is true, but God still sees everything, even the errors of man. Alright, if he sees our mistakes then how can he punish us for them if there is nothing that could be done to stop them, as God had already "seen" them? Therefore, if God is allowed to punish man, which I think all religious people will believe, then he is either committing a sin, in punishing someone for something they didn't have any control over doing, or doesn't have the power of predestination. You pick. Then again, God may not exist, so the whole argument would be void. That would be simpler.

I would also like to address that the common justification of God's omnipotence is that God exists extraneous of time. However, let's look at this too. If God is extraneous of time then he cannot have an impact on it, or even realize it exists. Because for to see the progression of time is to be classified by it. What you were doing when Rome burned, what you were thinking when Timmy's dog died, etc. If time exists anywhere, it is possible to judge your actions in accordance with time.

But then again I can make a second argument. Devoid of time, nothing changes. No action can be taken, because if something changes then there will be a time when it was the same and a separate time at which and after which it was changed. So how can God do anything ever if devoid of time?

Now let's move to a purely logical and empirical argument... If there are an infinite number of possible choices at any one time, then, providing that knowledge of predestination doesn't pop out of thin air and must be discovered through clues, then one must be able to learn all infinitely possible choices before understanding which one will be taken for certain. Unfortunately, with an infinite number of possibilities for even the first choice, you will forever be trying to predict the result of the first action and never even make it to the second, never mind the rest. Thus rendering you unable to predetermine life.

Of course we can come back to the same argument again, a time-devoid existence. If you have an infinite amount of time to ponder the infinite number of possibilities, the you will certainly be up to the task right? Wrong! And, for the same reason as God. You cannot accomplish anything, or change anything if you are devoid of time, because the moment something changes or is accomplished, even the smallest of things, you have time and are restricted by the infinite number of choices again.

So then, now that we understand that if there are an infinite number of choices that predestination cannot exist, let's prove that man has an infinite number of choices...

Let's start again with the religious view. Now there is no clear-cut answer to this one. But I think we can infer that if God created us in his image and gave us free will, that he gave us free will to test what we would do with it (that is providing predestination did not exist). Therefore there is no reason why God would then restrict our possible choices. In fact if he did, it would mean that he didn't actually give us free will at all.

Maybe however that even God cannot make an infinite number of choices for us to make because we are bound by time? Wrong, we only have to make one choice and I think it's pretty clear that we don't even weigh all the logical options before deciding many times never mind all possible of an infinite number of options.

The last argument will also work devoid of God. Man can have an infinite number of choices, but it's not necessary for any one man to know all options to make a decision. So we can throw that argument out in both cases.

But back to religion for a second... So it boils down to this: Either God gave you free will and infinite options, didn't give you free will by not giving you infinite numbers of choices, or God is incapable of giving infinite numbers of choices. The first scenario supports my belief. The second then disproves his omnipotence. God cannot be omnipotent if he can't create an infinite number of possibilities because that would mean that there would be a limit to God's knowledge. And if there's a limit to God's knowledge, it is feasible that then God may not be able to know how the universe will turn out. After all, the argument of predestination was created to solve the conflict that God's omnipotence created regarding our lives. (If God is omnipotent doesn't he know everything that has, is, and will ever happen?) With omnipotence out of the picture, then predestination has no reason to exist at all. Which then also answers option number three. If God is not omnipotent, then there is little reason to believe that he can see how the universe turns out. Predestination rests with the belief that God is omnipotent and if God is not omnipotent then God is also not, by definition, able to see everything.

Well, now that we've finished with religion... thankfully... we'll move on to logical reasons why man has infinite choices and thereby predestination cannot exist.

Firstly, if we cannot prove that there is a limit to the number of choices we have at any one time, then we cannot justify there being a limited number of choices to be made.

If there are a finite number of choices then logically at some point somewhere in the world there will come a decision that has only one choice or no choices at all. This is impossible because to have choice you must have at least 2 options by definition of the word choice.

If this is true, that there is a set number of choices to choose from, then there must be something that restricts or designates the number of choices. This is not predestination, as that contends no choices at all. It is also not free will which contends infinite options. But, it would have to be somewhere in between infinite and zero. Anyone who knows anything about numbers should see a problem here. Neither of these "numbers" are numbers at all. They are absolutes and contain no physical value whatsoever. That is, you cannot perceive three times zero worth of something or one sixth infinity worth of something. Therefore, there is no middle ground between "free will" and "predestination" theories. And, because of this, we have proven that there is nothing that designates the number of choices that man has. Thus, choices are either infinite or zero. But as I said, there is no determining factor as to which one will be true, infinite or zero. Therefore, as we are able to comprehend options, there must be at least two options, thereby there must be an infinite number of options.

Now we have proven that man has infinite possible choices, which means that predestination cannot exist at all.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Blank Slate

The future is unwritten and fluid. There is nothing that we are that is concrete. Our jobs, our families, our homes, our friends, our daily activities, none are concrete. Anything can change at any time. And for all of us, we are able to maneuver within our means.

Our means... But do they really exist? Is there really anything that we cannot do if we don't really really want to? Do you really believe that there is something that you can't do if you really try? If you do, you've got larger problems than any I can solve. Good luck.

But beyond this I have a rather more frightening thought. If we choose not to follow a given path, any given path, and decide to do something else, will anyone actually predict how our actions would have changed their lives?

Let me give you an example.

If my parents never met, I would not have been born. Would anyone actually be asking where I am? No. If I never moved to my home city, would my friends ask what happened to me? No. If I had gone to a different college than I did, would my friends and floormates ever wonder about where I was? No.

But let's turn it around again.

If my parents never met, would I be wondering about my birth? If my parents never moved to my home city, would I wonder about how my friends are doing? If I had chosen to go to a different college, would I wonder what my friends were up to?

No, I'd be off living another life, or not even living at all.

Now do you realize that we really have no purpose in life but what we make? It's true. If there is an infinite number of choices, each with it's own consequences and paths, each with its pros and cons, then there is no one set life and if there is no one set life path then no one path is more significant than any other. Therefore, all paths are equally insignificant when not taken and the world when taken. Taking the larger picture however, all paths (those taken and those not), are equally significant and insignificant at different times and in different instances, therefore all paths are either completely significant because of their possibility or completely insignificant for the same reason.

Taking that as true, we must also see that it is not the choice that is important, but the choice itself that is important. Purpose is the choices we make.

Now, let's take our interests out of the equation. Our interests are the determining factor of our choices, therefore without them, we should be able to see if we really have a purpose. Why do you work at the job you're at? Maybe it's because of money, to feed your family perhaps. Or maybe it's because you enjoy what you do. Why do you associate with the people you do? Friendship? Commonalities? Duty? Work? There are always reasons why we do what we do and why we make the choices that we make. But, remove your job, your friends, your family, and the rest of your interests and what's left? Nothing.

Removing your choices, you have no purpose. You are a complete blank slate. Your choices make you who you are. So make the choices you want and remember that life is not set. Predestination does not exist, but I'll get to that next time.

Monday, March 12, 2007

Race and Class Double-Consciousness

The dichotomy between the inflective self and the reflective being is present in everyone, however, the strength of the reflective in some people can be so much more dominant than the inflective; this aberration, when prevalent, will adversely affect their lives. This condition is prominent in groups of people or individuals who are particularly downtrodden, shunned, dismissed, belittled, and a thousand other words to the same effect. I would like to speak of two quite different instances where this aberration occurs, that is amongst African Americans and amongst the working class.

First before describing the dichotomy between the inflective and reflective selves we must understand what they are. The inflective self is the person that one sees themselves as. It dictates numerous traits that we project to the world including but not limited to self-confidence, pride, intro/extroversion, speech, and personality. The reflective self is the person that the world sees you as, usually based on a few basic traits such as race, creed, nationality, orientation, functionality, and sex. However other factors do play a role: body type, physical attributes (hair color, eye color, muscular strength, mental prowess, etc.). These are the factors of traditional stereotypes. They are completely independent of the person themselves and are assigned frequently without first meeting a person that fits a particular category.

Trouble can occur, however, at the metaphorical meeting place of the two half selves, human consciousness. If inflective and reflective self can come together be contained as a single entity, that is the differences between what one believes they are and what the world sees them as are close enough for conflict to become negligible or in the least manageable, then the person will be in harmony with the status quo. However, if the differences between the inflective and reflective are too vast to be reconciled or negated, then the person involved will be unsatisfied with their position in society, and in serious cases attain a sort of double-consciousness whereby both factors, the inflective and reflective will continuously vie for the advantage.

As I mentioned briefly before, there are two particular groups where this dichotomy between the inflective and reflective are seemingly irreconcilable, that is African Americans and the working class. Both of these groups have experienced and still experience discrimination and degradation from the reflective world. African Americans double-consciousness can find its roots in slavery (particularly American slavery for this example). Of course no African American alive today was ever a slave him or herself. Rather the stigma wrought from generations of bigotry and intolerance, of mistreatment and unabashed hate, and of the proliferation of stereotypical ideas centuries old have brought down on the African American psyche as a whole a pall, a shadow covering them from birth out of from under which they must crawl to be successful even in a nation where all are purported to be equal.

"...The Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world, -- a world which yields him no self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his two-ness, -- an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder." (Du Bois, 195)

The double-consciousness that W.E.B. Du Bois speaks of is one that is brought upon African Americans by stereotypes and manifested in our actions. It can be seen in our television shows, our movies, our music, our art, our culture, our religion. Four hundred years ago, Europeans justified slavery because by Christianizing them they were saving their souls; their bodies were dispensable in exchange for eternal bliss. Today remnants remain of this and other logical presumptions. In this country they are on average paid 18% less on average than Caucasians. Poverty rate for African Americans is 13.2%, that is 7.7% higher than it is for Caucasians (1). African Americans are the “red-shirts" (2) of our movies, particularly horror movies. There is no debate that they are better off now than they were pre-1865 (3) or even prior to the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960's. Truthfully, African-Americans are better off with each and every day that passes and each and ever racist that pushes up daisies But the problems brought about by slavery have yet to be solved, and so too the double-consciousness of African-Americans has yet to be resolved.

In the case of the working class, we have a separate but closely related problem. Unlike the dichotomy between African American inflective selves and reflective selves, the cause for working class inflective and reflective halve differentiation is difficult to pin down. At best we can offer a few examples of the suppression of the working class. In the United States, this is easier because most of us came from different countries at some point or another in our history and equally so most of us started off as a member of the working poor or as a subsistence farmer. In addition, one can pick out various “waves” of immigration from other countries to the United States. The English came first, but they are the trend-setter not an example.

The Germans came next and examples of bias against them were prevalent. “It is an old tradition in New York city that German immigrants, unlike the children of other lands, no sooner set foot upon the American shores than they piously turn to hottest labor for a livelihood, eschewing politics as they would gambling and other kindred vices...” (4) This quote, though as part of an article actually promoting German involvement in politics in 1872, shows quite a bias still, stereotyping Germans into the working poor.

The Chinese came as well. Senate Republican John H. Mitchell had this to say on the Senate floor about Chinese immigration: “The Pacific States and Territories were more interested than any other section of our country in this new evil, threatening imminent and dangerous to the social, moral and industrial interests of that section. He depicted the evils which had come upon the Pacific Coast through the influx of Chinese, and said there would be no stop to this resistless flow of these people. ...Fifty millions could be spared and not missed, a greater number the the population of our whole country. ...Crush out this viper which is gnawing at [the nation's] vitals.” (5) This excerpt featured in an article from the Boston Globe dated May 17th 1876 shows the obvious and blatant bias against the admission of Chinese immigrants into the United States.

...And the Irish came to America too. “...During the last three months, some twelve thousand arrests were made in [New York City]. Of these, eight thousand were Irish.... The proportion of foreign criminals is as five to one in the prison which law-abiding citizens are so heavily taxed to support. New York... has been... a house of refuge to all the down-trodden wretches of the world. Escaped convicts and men who had not the remotest claim to our sympathy.” (6) And they too were discriminated against for being “lawless” and “violent”, “the downtrodden wretches of the world.”

As one can see, nearly all immigrant populations have been discriminated against at one point or another. In addition, most of these people then begin their lives in this country as part of the working poor. Unfortunately (though not coldly so), immigrants do not solely make up this pool of working class citizens. Many people native to this land of “equality” and “justice” are forced to work on subsistence wages, a pay rate at which you are just barely making ends meet, and not in a preferable manner. The working poor has its roots in immigrant labor and the prejudices that many in our nation have propagated over the centuries have transformed them from prejudices of ethnicity (which are still prejudices nonetheless) into prejudices of class. They have transformed a bigotry of a race to a bigotry of a socio-economic position, the working class position.

Today, one need not be prejudicial against race to be prejudicial against the poor. They are now an entity to themselves in this country; yet also, the poor and working classes today remain labeled, quite unfairly, as being migrant workers and immigrants. In the majority sense, this is completely unfounded and untrue.

An interesting look at the topic of working class comes from Barbara Ehrenreich, a PhD holder in cellular biology. In 2000, she undertook an experiment to see if she could live working for minimum wage. She took a series of jobs in three different cities. As a maid in Maine, she made this observation: “'We are nothing to these people,' she said. 'We're just maids.' Nor are we much of anything to anyone else. Even convenience store clerks, who are $6-an-hour gals themselves, seem to look down on us.” (7) This is the reflective self of a working class person in our country today. They are looked down upon or even ignored. They are little more than scum in the eyes of many Americans, both rich and middle class, because of prejudices set down from centuries ago.

Now that we have a sense of the identities forced upon the working poor and African Americans and have touched on the history behind such manifestations, we can look at its affects on the inflective self. The inflective self, or inner self, is how we each as people look at ourselves. When those views are positive and in concordance with how society sees us, we are happy and content with our lives. When those views are negated by a society that sees us as sub-par or unequal in some way, we become unhappy, depressed even.

For the working class person, there is a risk that the inflective self will not be lived up to by the actual living self. Feelings of self-worthlessness can attack even the strongest willed individuals over time. People of this class work hard; this is no misconception. Many have to work two and three jobs just to make ends meet. In addition, society sees them in a negative light. They are “nothing” to them. They are “invisible” to society because we choose to ignore that which causes us guilt. This ignorance bores into the psyche of the working poor leaving them with one of two results. Either they accept their position as all too many do. Or they continuously fight their reflective image. This is the double-consciousness, where one believes they are something that society believes they are not. And, they must fight society to retain some semblance of who they really are, lest they doom themselves to a life of miserable and passive acceptance of everything society wants to be true.

For African Americans the dichotomy of which we've spoken can be doubly difficult to overcome. Not only do they have to contend with racism, but many (far more than the overall U.S. average) have to deal with classism and classist bigotry too, just as the working poor must. This leads to an even greater risk of a double-consciousness and it's resultant effects on one's emotional state. One of the best examples of this dual dichotomy, that of the assault of class and race reflective bigotry on the psyche of African Americans, comes again from Barbara Ehrenreich. Actually it is a continuation of the previous quote:

"...I don't look so good by the end of the day and probably smell like eau de toilet and sweat, but it's the brilliant green-and-yellow uniform that gives me away, like prison clothes on a fugitive. Maybe, it occurs to me, I'm getting a tiny glimpse of what it would be like to be black." (Nickeled and Dimed, 100)

These examples, those of race and class double-consciousness, are but two of innumerable cases where such an occurrence can run rampant on the human mind. It is caused by bigotry and stereotypes. As we have seen its effects are long-lasting. Even one hundred and fifty years later African Americans are still vastly more susceptible to the reflective self than the average person. And, unfortunately this susceptibility is cyclical. The more you are trapped by it, the more it traps you. We must learn to break this circle of susceptibility not just in the cases of the working poor and African Americans but in life in general. We must understand the bigotry and stereotypes have consequences and that they will greatly and adversely affect our society for decades and even centuries to come if we do not consciously try to stop them. The dark stain on our nation may have grayed over the past decades and centuries but it's yet to be completely removed. This is the what we must do if we truly want to live in a country and speak of a country where all are created equal.

1Based on data collected in 2005 by the U.S. Census Bureau.
2“Red-shirt” is a term given to the random character that would accompany the landing crew on the original Star Trek series when they came upon a new planet. They would inevitably be the first, if not only, to die. It is a reference to the color uniform shirt they wore.
3Slaves in the south were freed in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln under his executive order, the Emancipation Proclamation, however the Thirteenth Amendment freed the remainder of slaves (in Kentucky and Delaware) in 1865 formally abolishing the practice.
4“Germans in Politics.” Boston Daily Globe; November 11, 1872.
5“The Chinese Problem.” Boston Daily Globe, May 17th 1876. pp. 5.
6“Foreign Criminals in New-York.” The New York Times. February 22nd 1858. p. 4.
7Ehrenreich, Barbara. Nickeled and Dimed. New York: Owl Books, 2001. p. 100.


Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt. Strivings of the Negro People In Atlantic Monthly 80:194-198 (August 1897). Boston: Atlantic Monthly Co., 1897. p. 195.

Ehrenreich, Barbara. Nickeled and Dimed. New York: Owl Books, 2001. p. 100.

“Foreign Criminals in New-York.” The New York Times. February 22nd 1858.

“Germans in Politics.” Boston Daily Globe, November 11, 1872.

Median Earnings in the last 12 Months, (In 2005 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars). U.S. Census Bureau, 2005. Accessed 12 March 2007.

“The Chinese Problem.” Boston Daily Globe, May 17th 1876. pp. 5.

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Computer and the Brain- Genius and Insane

We are nothing more and nothing less than the information stored in our brain and our brain itself. Our knowledge is data run through a processor chip. Your brain is that processor. Some people have higher grade processors than others. Some will last longer; others will degrade slower. But every brain does the same job. Your genes are the rules by which your processor runs. Your emotions give priority to certain tendancies and presidence to certain reactions. Each and every person is configured differently, thus each and every person is different, but each and every one is an important part of the greaterverse.

The greaterverse is not real. It is a concept solely devised to group together like actions. It is the compilation of all action, interaction and the causes and results of said actions and interactions. It is the "1's" and "0's" of the program of our lives as it runs through our brain. But we must remember not to confuse our brain with a computer, for they, though they preform many of the same actions, do not maintain data in the same fashion. Indeed, the brain can sometimes work against its host based on the rules of its operation and too can a computer, both because we've misplaced the owner's manual.

The brain stores information based on necessity or emotional provocation. You won't remember something that is truly unremarkable and you don't have to or forget to have to. Computers store information that the host deems important, those that have necessity or emotional value.

We must see that the brain fails us more often than the computer. Why? Because our brains are far more complex than a computer. They work off different rules. If you want to remember something, there is no save button for guarenteed success.

The computer and the brain are alike in different ways as well. If I save a file on my computer it is quite possible for someone to change its contents before I view it again. Maybe I have a dozen files, or 140, or a thousand. How can we be sure that the file that we left is the same as the file that we reopen at a later time? Likewise, how can we be sure that a memory, taken and saved at a particular time, won't be altered by our actions and interactions before we open it again? It's impossible to keep track.

Then we come to the matter of what to believe and too we have a similiarity. We cannot know what to believe. Our minds and computers alike play us for fools. What is reality? Reality is what we think it is presently. It is ever changing and ever elusive. It is ever different to each of us. What is truth but what we make it? It is just that and nothing more. Truth is just information whose story is told through the lens of reality, which is ever fluid. So then I pose one final query: What difference does it make to you?

Monday, March 5, 2007

My Name is Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and I am Your King

My name is Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and I am your King.
  • To be my follower you must renounce all other authority.
  • To be my follower you must recant the teachings of secularists.
  • To be my follower you must believe that I am good and all else is bad.
  • To be my follower you must reject empirical thought, as my word is law.

  • My word is infallible.
  • My word is eternal and everlasting.
  • My word is the only authority.
  • My word is sacred.
  • My word is to be revered as are those who speak it.

  • Those who speak against me are heretics.
  • Those who deny my teachings are blasphemous.
  • Those who forgo my lessons will be killed.
  • Those who spread my word will be rewarded.
  • Those who die for my cause will be exalted.
  • Those who follow my instruction unquestionably will be saved.

  • Saved are those who follow in my footsteps.
  • Saved are those who cover their bodies.
  • Saved are those who drink not from false prophets.
  • Saved are those who defend the traditions of my nation.
  • Saved are those who pray for my divine grace.
  • Saved are those who denounce the idols of the western world.
  • Saved are those who kill in my name.

My name is Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and I am your King.


Now replace Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's name with God and reread this passage. Fun huh?