This is one blog I always read for food for thought. One blog, I should say, I find friends and great commentary. One blog, worthy of just reading for information.

Hope each one’s new year is better than the last for for sure! This is the year we turn the corner on the bush administration. let’s get with the program and all get out there and vote…I am one who subscribes that the vote is ours to do, so do it, for Heavens sake. MANY HUGS

Talking about “splainin”. The first thing I’m going to do on January 21, 2009 is call Immigration and tell them to explain to me, a natural born American citizen, what they refused to explain when I called them in May 2001 because, “We can’t give you any information about this case”.

Plenty of gobble and not too much de gook, I think!

I have decided to enclose 2 paragraphs of my yet to be formally titled book. Though on face value the theme is different, the message is kinda the same & some, so in the spirit of Christmas:

“I talk a lot of human beings undermining God in the name of Religion. It has been said before that not all Religions can be right. Certainly the most repressive ones seem to be all about the pursuit of human interests. God can go hang. They are definitely open to scrutiny; so scrutinise I do in the following chapters. Rather more philosophic systems, such as Buddhism and Zen are open to scrutiny on the grounds that they make excellent observations but not too many recommendations. Taking drugs is bad if you don’t prepare yourself for the outcome. The job of the philosopher is to define observations and then provide some feedback as to the pros and cons of going down a particular path. There is no such thing as right or wrong, good or bad until any outcome has materialised and then judgement will ensue. And it is only through judgement that it can be categorised as good or bad. For some good will be bad and others bad will be good. Therefore an outline of the necessary steps to the outcome is all important and childish brand names such as “good” or “bad” are irrelevant. Indeed it is a direct result of name calling that all the Religious idealists have not been able to cooperate to find [at least] a human absolute for the human contempt of God. By that I mean, how dare God interfere with our interests?

This leads me nicely on to the big cop out, atheism. As I explain atheism is an oxymoron as you cannot prove what doesn’t exist. The more dangerous are the pocket atheists. A modern example would be President George W Bush, who parades his verbal commitment, but at every test is incapable of demonstrating it. There is only one thing that separates the faithful (believers in God) and the faithless (atheists). This is the belief in eternal life. Obviously we would not continue in human form, but one model I have outlined is the ego, spirit and soul. The atheist simply exists to accumulate, for there is no “after life” (this is a tricky term as I stress later in this work, our consciousness is complex), no judgement, no reason to anything that does not absolutely benefit self. People I talk to about judgement describe an old man with a beard on a thrown casting judgement. Though rarely any of these actually believe that. That’s what they were told at Sunday school or some other event. Real judgement is your exposure to your life in terms of and infront of everyone you have affected and you must judge yourself from the point you started your life until the point you ended it. Therefore, those who have faith are extremely reluctant to drop nuclear bombs or any other device on innocent people. They are extremely reluctant to instigate phoney wars and insist on the death penalty for victims of social revenge. Atheists sleep easy in their beds, as they don’t believe in God or anything other than themselves and what they can get out of life.”

Unedited, writing scraps. I hope a few get something out of it.

May it be a better year for all than the several years have been.