Subject: Many Christians are glad there are STDs
8-20-08
Christian brochures that push abstinence or marriage only:
Again, you can tell they like the fact that there are STDs to support their endeavor. But, after there are cures for STDs, the only logic they will have left to advise teens away from sex outside marriage, will be the importance of women needing to obtain financial support / gain from men – using their sex as a restriction for men to give them things they want; like it really is still today. And that will “easily” reveal it with “prostitution”: something the Bible does condemn. “Easy” enough that even the human mind will be able to understand it… maybe. Well, at least it will be “easier” for people like me to explain it, to get it “understood.” And, even if the woman is financially independent, they still use their sex just to imprison him into monogamy, just for the prideful idea of it.
The atheists / promiscuous sex people will not be able to understand it, because they support prostitution; and, the “Christians” will not be able to understand it, because they support marriage. I will be the only person in the world that will be able to present the correct commentary to it.
Answer this:
Do we really want Christian leaders who would pressure the government to suppress STD cures?
Could this be Reverend Wright’s AIDS cover-up source?:
Particularly the part: “The HIV/AIDS virus is the result of many steps in the laboratory, it was no accident.”
Also see the book: Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, 1997, by Leonard Horowitz.
All I can say is that if any of this is right, then lots of people will suffer in Fair Afterlife Punishment for a long time, including any media who helps cover it up. Definitely repent and reconcile now, the sooner the better – for… you! It would not surprise me at all that those are so dumb that they think they serve God by hurting innocent people. Bible corruption on the issues of homosexuality – which I (only) have refuted all – can have devastating results. And, I am probably the only one who has ever explained how bi-sexual love (real love between one another) would make the world a much better place. You all think different because you’ve been “taught” otherwise – no other reason; because the human animal is much “dumber” than the other animals, as animals have less means for becoming gullible.
If such is the case, you media people need to all get into a circle holding hands and pray hard that there is no such a thing as God. You will think the powerful feeling in the room has overruled Fair Afterlife Punishment. Many churches have proved that.
There appears to be a lot of “disinformation” rebutting the above conspiracy sources and more; which just makes total sense if the government is trying to cover up facts. I don’t know who’s right and who’s lying. That’s for the expertise of the media to find out and report to the public. If the “disinformation” supporting the government is the false information, then it’s being supported by our current administration. Media and administrative silence in reply to the internationally suggested statement of Mr. Wright just indicates guilt. Obviously Mr. Wright did have sources and was not speaking alone; therefore, this issue needs to be settled by the major media, and merits an honest support or refutation from the President. This should be the case in any other medical cover-up as well. If some parts are correct and some parts incorrect, then these parts need to be distinguished individually with no spin. If this kind of corruption is going on in our government, I shouldn’t have to explain how it’s the direct cause of many of the problems Americans have. Again, if you’re all too dumb to figure out if something is good or bad for the country overall, then you need to ask me first.
Come on: investigate. Don’t you want to know how wonderful the United States is disallowing the practice of all those false AIDS and cancer cure claims, that one can supposed get in other countries (like Mexico, Canada, Europe, etc.). If these claims are bogus, then we are really something great for exposing its fraud and disallowing its practice. If these claims are true, then we are the scum of the planet. Especially now, since Reverend Wright opened the media door for it, I bet half the black community is just believing him, since there is no solid major media refutation. This just justifies future crime. The only media thing I’ve heard is that certain people just personally don’t believe it. That’s far from solid evidence. Reading between the lines, it sure seems like there’s some kind of cover-up, with knowledge. I guess you have to believe in Jesus’ assurance of Fair Afterlife Punishment in the Bible, instead of what you hear at church. Again, “to convey a false impression” is not only in the definition of the word lie, but it DOES bring harm against thine’s brother. Just because your “brother” may not directly know who the real culprit is, doesn’t mean God doesn’t know. Everyone is either “brother” or “sister” in the terminology of Christ. Therefore, for example, one should be able to easily see that wronging one’s “sister” would also apply equally, without Jesus having to overly detail it. True “faith” in Jesus requires adding the one extra step. Otherwise, you’re missing the point needed for salvation.
Also see this kind of suppression detail: http://www.rense.com/general81/aidsre.htm. I think the government should suppress said medical benefits only after the media has presented all the facts to the public. And, all I see is a media not wanting to talk about it at all. O’Reilly would rather take his time talking about girls who show their breasts during spring break, rather than possible major government corruptions. Especially problematic after Reverend Wright presented the possibility into everyone’s mind. I mean many people can tell that Reverend Wright appears sound enough that he wouldn’t tell this to his entire congregation unless he was certain. And if he is wrong, then that just also means more major media attention needs to be given to correcting conspiracy theories. That’s right, just put the facts and the expert’s opinions on the screen. Otherwise, the government knows they can get away with just about anything. And just try to convince me how our government will stay corruption free, knowing they really don’t have to. Reading this and reading that doesn’t mean much to me, until there’s debate between the contenders detailing every point. Someone please tell O’Reilly and MSNBC that we need to learn what can and can’t really hurt us. I know these conspiracy theories lose a lot of their integrity when they state far-fetched things like 9/11 was an inside job, but things that are realistic possibilities should be addressed. If the government dropped the twin towers just so the public would support their spying on Americans, then they wouldn’t bother just spying on a greater array of suspected criminals / problem makers, they just anonymously kill them… like Stalin did. Again, if you can’t figure out on your own how government corruption could be bad for the country, then you need to learn how to ask me first, before you decide to “just” go along with it “assuming” it’s for the better. Nobody’s going to fire big names like O’Reilly for presenting it. Contrarily, it would just make his name bigger, as the vast majority of people would love it, and consider it as finally a major accomplishment.
More on abortion:
You mean it’s okay to kill a kid during an abortion, but not if he survives a botched abortion at the same time? Like… there’s a much earlier line that no one except me seems to be able to reckon. Explain to me how everyone is not an idiot! Explain to me how there’s no need for improvement! And “I’m” the idiot. Plus, compared with not aborting embryos, explain also how abstinence advice doesn’t “disallow” a child to come into this world? The real difference is because abstinence advice hampers other people’s pleasure, while becoming pregnant doesn’t have pleasure (for those who don’t want to be), and actually leads to pain and suffering. So, these far-right religious conservatives are all like Hannity and just wish pain and suffering on others, especially victims of their cop-outs. They are the epitome of evil. The far-left pro-choice people are all the epitome of dumb, including Obama apparently. (I totally realize being “somewhere between the extremes” and being honest isn’t going to make me any friends. It’s not so much that “I” don’t care, it’s that God doesn’t need to seek individual’s approval.)
If a child is along enough to be able to live outside on its own, then abortion should definitely be outlawed! Come on people: “try” to get it “right,” so I won’t feel so obligated in having to do all this writing. I am really getting tired of it. But I place God first.
Deep thoughts:
What am I supposed to do if I fall in love at first sight with a picture of a hooker who lived in 1870? This idea that there’s only one person for everyone has some problems.
And what’s worse, is when you meet a beautiful woman, that treats you nice, that doesn’t play any games, with wonderful memorable experiences; then you wake up and realize, “oh shoot, oh shoot,” it was all a dream. Conversely, I’m sure women sometimes wake up after they meet the perfect guy, who gives her the most beautiful jewelry she’s ever seen, inundated with flowers touring her new big house in the country with servants, brand new expensive car, and hands her a credit card with her / his name on it titled “Mrs.” That’s gotta be worse. (I’m aware both would also like the other’s benefits, I’m just describing today’s wishful goal set in the minds of each gender. There are exceptions but men treat women very nice in this country, and men don’t desire as much fluff.)
Men seek love, and women seek possessions. And what today’s church, O’Reilly, and others hate is today’s women who are truly “independent” and are seeking just love. Rev. 17:5: Mysterious Harlots: the abominations of the earth says so correctly what women have historically been, which corrupt secular government (food only available at market via money) and the corrupted church advocates / demands. Apparently only a person with a very, very high abstract reasoning ability can see this. And Revelation says the harlotry will be ending, and Jesus says everyone will eventually have pure love. – Only in an open-sex world which includes a Nationally Paid Child Support Program.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_answer_abstract_reasoning, How do you answer abstract reasoning?:
Abstract reasoning is the ability to analyze information and solve problems on a thought based level. It requires the ability to apply what you know in problem solving. It requires various skills and Individuals possess different strengths and weaknesses in those skills. When there is a significant weakness it is identified as a learning disability and various therapies are used to improve the weak areas.
Well, I say let’s get those “various therapies” going. Especially to all religious, media and government leaders. Also, for whoever is in charge of changes to, and new ideas for, new and existing products / services. Then, maybe there can be hope for the world. Otherwise, trial and error should eventually get it, like it has in the past, but if everyone could reckon like me, betterment for the future can be had hundreds of times faster. Obviously, those who excel in “verbal communication skills” lack in “abstract reasoning skills.”
Monopolization of food and land:
You see, the organized farming standard is better than nomadic culture (or more spread out populations), but makes it easy for the rich to cut out the poor. Welfare basically gives back from the trick the rich use to steal from the poor. It’s like if I invented a machine that monopolized clear air, which causes more pollution to the rest of the air, where paying me would be the only way for people to get clean air. It’s like if I invented a machine that makes the water better, but pollutes all the rest of the water for my cattle profits, then tell everyone you need to pay me to have clean water. Some may thing that the cattle farmers and people who eat meat are the ones who should pay for vegetarians’ water bill. Unless you have a very high abstract reasoning ability, you’re not going to be able to figure out the unfairness. Overall, I think those who profit the most by the overall system (the rich) are the ones who should pay in increased welfare taxes. In Kansas City 200 years ago, one could live free off the land, rich in food and building resources, and still have everything they have built their entire life; but today, if you have attended 13 years of school and worked 40 years, and become homeless, you don’t have anything! So you tell me where fairness should lie. The American Indians where flabbergasted when they heard how the “civilized” white man couldn’t eat until he paid for it: something (food) they considered very easy to obtain, and in abundance.
It’s like if I repaired your car, but now you have to pay me a royalty the rest of your life. Then you might be able to understand that kind of unfairness; not the “unfairness” where you consider yourself as a freeloader for trying to not pay the royalty for the rest of your life.
Plus, since progress and thinking out better ideas has soared since the abolishment of slavery, I think it will soar even more once everyone realizes they don’t “have to” work. Just like how college students do better when they have their ends-meet taken care of (parents pay all bills). Most anyone can become a doctor when they have the time, the motivation, and the money. That’s what scholarships are all about: trying to give the gifted student the “money” to help make it a better world. Why not give a better start for all aptitudes / motivations? I mean, one-step logic says the economy should be worse if you have to pay slaves “more” (because they can now “quit”). So why is it better? Today, it’s easier to understand the unfairness of slavery, but there are still a lot of jobs in this country where they’re getting more, but still not to the point of non-complaint (listen to pre-1998 country songs). And this seems to be the time for a need in more well thought out changes in products and new ideas, which requires more “time” to reckon it all out. (Lots of it has to do with the time needed to rationalize that some products don’t need a change.) And few employers “see” a benefit in allowing employees more “thinking” time, because it simply looks like they aren’t working. If employees had more time to sit on the back porch rather than working them as many hours as possible, then it’d get done. For example, Japan works the tail off all employees and is known for high production, but lack in innovation; where the U.S. allows “more” time to goof off, and is know for innovation. Adding “more” to goofing off should logically get better traction on the road to progress. It’s like we can get a car built with more employees or with more technologically advanced robots / machines. So, when unemployment goes up, that just means we’ve advanced overall to not need everyone to work. But since welfare is seen as a negative, something has to get goofed up just to lower that degrading welfare. I mean really, when John Deere invents a better tractor to procure higher yield, something somewhere else has to suffer to keep everyone working. When innovative ideas allow less people to work, which is the goal, then working less hours or more people on welfare should go up overall. But, it can’t when a job is the only way to eat. So it’s no wonder there’s so much dishonesty and ignorance in products and services today as everyone strives for a market that really shouldn’t be there. Attorney General’s offices try to fight it, but say they can’t – likely because there’s way too much of it. If innovators had more time to ponder pros and cons on new ideas, because they liked their job because it paid good; and progress meant that everyone overall gained, instead of lost their ends-meet, then I think it would be a better and more progressive world. Once innovation has caused a lot less people the need to work to make ends meet, then, in boredom, they can start making all the fluff.
It wouldn’t surprise me at all, that cures for cancer are suppressed, simply because a lot of people would lose their jobs / profits. A government ends-meet payment to everyone, where jobs only pay “more” (with paying harder jobs and jobs requiring education, even “more”) would solve these kinds of problems, sending better ideas and advancement to the benefit of “everyone.” But, I’m just trying to get to first base with a Nationally Paid Child Support Program.
The only thing that stands in the way is the idea that employees who gets ends-to-meet free aren’t going to go to work for “more” if they don’t “have to,” refuted by how college students have more time to study when they don’t have to work, how people still work the rest of the year after they’ve made “enough” in 6 months, how slaves continued to work after abolishment, etc. I actually suggest that not only college students get free food and rent, but that they get paid something for making the world better (studying). That will help “motivate” more people to educate themselves, for better future progress overall, as most jobs needed are jobs requiring education or experience.
If anyone wants an economic solution, there it is. Don’t “trust” me: try it in some small poor country somewhere and see how it works. You just have to make the jobs (and schools) easily available. Contact me for further details (don’t trust yourselves). A government ends-meet payment to everyone just basically rearranges how people get paid today. The question is, is if happier workers are more productive workers. And most employers have found that the answer is “yes.” Adding open-sex to all this (eliminating that kind of slavery too) will also help a lot.
(Why do if feel like I am only talking to people hundreds of years in the future.) (Probably a post-nuclear-war world.)
The marriage standard:
People ask me what would be wrong with a world where everyone just got married and stayed together? Well, whenever you require everyone to just seek “one,” wanting the most attractive will still be the game to win; and therefore, there will be many people who have to make do with all the not-so-attractive people. Therefore continuing unnecessary lifetime depression, alcoholism, domestic violence, etc. So, marriage can never be the perfect / Godly solution. Plus, it is an impossibility with effective birth control and eventual STD cures. If it ain’t gonna happen, churches should start considering my thesis. There’s no way their mind can just all of a sudden see the light, so I suggest that they “try” (in difficult, sacrificing effort) to just “consider” what I’m saying.
Bush says a good leader listens to our commanders in Iraq rather than American opinion:
First of all, that just proves that the Iraq war is not being “won,” which just justifies the “winning” solution of just pulling out, and letting someone else that Iraqis like better control the country – maybe Iran or Syria(?) (since Saddam Hussein isn’t available anymore, who showed he had much better control of Iraq than we do). If our “freedom” / gift to the Iraqi people can’t be seen, especially after 5 years, then we should just stop trying to beat the dead horse. Americans are still dying today in Iraq just because Bush doesn’t want to surrender his pride. Bias minded Republicans (actual detriments to the world), and dumber people (country music listeners) feel the exact same way. If Hannity knew his kid was the next to die in Iraq, then the game wouldn’t seem as important. But somebody’s kid will be. I say let’s gets our military material people back here, to get jobs doing more and better police work here where they are needed, rather policing a country that is actually justified in killing them. Of course, I’m obviously not suggesting anything that the majority of Americans don’t want, I’m just explaining the logic of it better. Then “just” get along (treat fair) whoever the new leader of Iraq would be that they all like, where no justified prejudice can be determined. Otherwise, logic says Iraqi problems will continue indefinitely. John McCain could even do this. But then there’s the Israel unfairness we won’t admit to. Well, I guess we “just” deserve whatever comes our way in the future. And, we won’t know when we’re creating more of a problem, until it’s too late. The Iraq war proves that. Now Russia is fiery mad at us, for just our abundance of unfair and bias speech. We’re never going to learn. Again, Russia’s not handling anything in Georgia any different than we handle the same kind of problems in other countries. To us, it’s ALL a game. But, the Iraq problem has to get better one way or the other after Bush is gone.
Crude thoughts:
Pain at the pump could be a blessing in disguise, as I’m hearing more and more about alternative energy. It makes sense as dumb as our leaders are, that we’d never convert to better things until there is a crisis. “Dumb”: it’s a second base hurtle for achieving a better future. A lot of it might have to do with the same reason medical cures may be suppressed – to maintain current jobs (and more profits for the few). So, my welfare praise plan seems to be the answer for this also.
Jewish temple written warning to gentiles:
In the days of Jesus, written in both Greek and Latin at all five entrances to the Jerusalem temple: “No stranger is permitted to cross this barrier into the holy place. Whoever does so must take upon himself the consequences of his act: the penalty of death.” You see, before Jesus, God was not the “one” / monotheistic God, because “one” God would also be the God of the gentiles / strangers. Too bad the Jews can’t recognize that the Muslims have to be under a monotheistic God. “Jesus” is the Jews solution! “Pride” won’t let it happen. But, “Jesus” finally “fulfilled” what the Jews wondered for centuries, but could never figure out on their own. And since God is God of the entire world, then one could live anywhere in the world, and still be right with God. “Cop-outs” won’t let it happen. “Logic”: I bet they hate it.
oreilly@foxnews.com:
O’Reilly especially doesn’t want you to be like me when righting him.
Fifi Trixibelle Critical:
Yeah, my girl likes it when I throw her a steak. Yeah, good baby.
You gotta know ‘em to understand ‘em.
Mr. Critical – Somewhere between the extremes:
TO SEE PRIOR SUPERIOR WRITINGS (and more):
http://www.the-Goldenrule.name/