Archive for the freedom Category

Crime: Blame it on Heaven?

Posted in False religion, freedom, Government, liberals, multiculturalism, political correctness, progressives, separation of church and state, toleration, Uncategorized, worldview with tags on June 23, 2012 by devilbloggger

Crime.

It probably does not surprise you to know that I love crime.  I love lawlessness.  I love people who are lawless.  I love people who believe their actions carry no moral weight beyond their selfish ends.  I love people who believe they can flaunt the law because there is no one who can stop them, and if someone does stop them there are no negative consequences.

And I’m not talking about President Obama.  (But don’t you just love how he can explicitly flaunt the law and get away with it?  Who’s going to stop my main beelzebud???  Ha ha ha ha ha ha.  I love it!).

No, I’m talking plain old ordinary crime.

I am the author of crime, which is merely man’s name for what amounts to breaking God’s law (and, usually, his heart).

God?

What does God have to do with crime?

Well, apparently a lot according to a pleasingly misleading headline over at CBS Seattle.  The title initially baffled me: Study Finds People Who Believe in Heaven Commit More Crimes.

Vraiment?  Etes-vous sûr?

Something seemed amiss, even to moi.

So I investigated a little, and found to my great satisfaction, that my instincts were correct, and my will on Earth is lurching along just fine; it was just another example of my media slanting a story (they thought) against Christians.

No!

Yes!

You see, my servants, after the arresting title (get it?), anyone who reads the story will find a different story.  The very first line reads:

Believing if you are on a “highway to hell” could impact whether or not if you commit a crime.

What?  I thought this was about belief in Heaven (note, also, CBS’s editorial mistake of not capitalizing the name of a real place).

Well, there was a heavenly slant.  The article continues:

A study published in the scientific journal PLoS One by University of Oregon’s Azim Shariff and University of Kansas’s Mijke Rhemtulla finds that people who believe in hell are less likely to commit a crime while people who believe in heaven more likely are to get in trouble with the law.

Well, well.  Let’s think about that statement for a moment, shall we?

Go ahead, think.

I’m waiting.

Because if you think for yourself about the above statement you will be rewarded by a great insight into my almost complete success in blinding the postmodern human mind.

Oh, OK, I’ll tell you.

Note the implications of the research above: people who believe in Heaven apparently don’t believe in Hell!

How can this be?

You see?  The people who believe in Heaven commit crimes.  But if they believed in Hell, the wouldn’t.

Who are these people?

Well, let me gloat: these are my people.

You see, Christians believe in both Heaven AND Hell (or else they would not be Christians)

But there are swarms of my misguided out there who live by wishful thinking, and who are apt to believe in Heaven, but believe Hell is a myth.

Wouldn’t you?

After all, if Truth were mere merely convenient, so that it conformed to what one thought about it, all those Heaven-not-Hell’ers would be on their way to paradise–crimes and all!

But . . .

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh, my.  Pardonnez-moi, mes amis.

Of course, Truth is not changed by what anyone thinks about it.  And you should see the Heaven-not-Hell’ers as they come tumbling down the chute through my wide-open gates!  Suddenly those crimes come flooding back into their  now-permanently depraved minds.

After all, Earth is the only place in the universe where there are beings who do not believe in Hell.

But no one stays on Earth forever.

So, of course, just like belief in God, everyone eventually believes in Hell.

So, my servants, let’s keep this study quiet.  After all, if governments and societies were led by smart and wise people, they would once again teach little chillens the truth about Hell.  And if that happened I would see many fewer startled faces tumbling into my kingdom.  The study authors, in fact, “believe that the study raises “important questions about the potential impact of religious beliefs on global crime.”

Yes, it does.

Shhhhh!

If I had a daughter, she would look like Julia

Posted in freedom, liberals, liberty, Obama, politics, progressives, secularism, welfare state, worldview with tags , , on May 5, 2012 by devilbloggger

Julia.

By Jove, I think they’ve got it, those Americans.  That is, of course, if America’s own Julius Obama can successfully convince 1 or 2 more percent of the remaining 51% of free Americans of the benefits of Father Government.

Father Government, you ask?

Yes, as in Our Father, who art in Washington . . .

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh, the Obama administration is so over the top that I’m concerned that at any time the 51% of holdouts to complete government dominance will finally wake up and shout STOP!

Oh, but they must be dulled to sleep by the complacency freedom breeds.

For those who are wondering what “Julia” has to do with any of this, let me enlighten you.

“The Life of Julia” is, as Rich Lowry states, “the Obama reelection team’s cartoon chronicle of a fictional woman who is dependent on government at every step of her life.”

And a beautiful thing it is.

Thy government come, thy will be done in my life as it is in Washington . . .

With Julia, Obama reveals a vision for a nation of helpless women who depend on a benevolent government for everything, literally from cradle-to-grave.  This woman Julia, incidentally, has no father, husband, or, apparently, any family, except for her fatherless child.

Give me this day my daily bread, as well as my daily birth control and lots of other free stuff . . .

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Dana Loesch, a writer over at Big Government, said it best after chronicling in detail why Julia is straight out of my kingdom dreams:

As a woman, the idea that I can’t accomplish anything in life unless a male in government plans it out for me is offensive. It’s amazing to me how progressives reject the oversight of the Divine and the gift of free will but embrace the oppressive oversight of flawed men who reject free will. Men, too, should be offended at their lack of representation in the life of Julia–the white, faceless female stereotype that the Obama administration sees as the average female voter.

And forgive my self-control as I forgive those who exercise self-control over me . . .

Ha ha ha ha ha.

How right Ms. Loesch is.

It’s a good thing the 51% are dulled.

And lead us not into the temptation of freedom, but deliver us to evil . . .

If I had a daughter, she would look just like Julia.  Faceless and dependent upon government for everything.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

For mine is the kingdom, the power, and the gory almost forever and ever . .

Amen.

Me and Rush Limbaugh’s big mouth!

Posted in abortion, freedom, Government, marriage, Obama, political correctness, politics, Sexual revolution, Truth with tags , , , on March 6, 2012 by devilbloggger

Fluke.

It’s not a fluke, I suppose, my friends.  And it’s not your fault.  I leaked some kingdom knowledge in my February 12th post, and I forgot to remind you to keep it confidential.  And one of you must have blabbed.  It looked bad, and I’ve laid low this past week trying to salvage my self-inflicted bad fluck–I mean luck.

My faithful readers will understand.

Just weeks ago I was beaming with pride as the American liberals insisted on putting their hands on (and in) women’s bodies by dictating through their dictator that all forms of birth control must now be dictated as part of the welfare dole for all women.

Imagine my delight in the twisted logic of liberals:  Liberal women love to chant “Keep your hands off my body” when they want the government-sanctioned right to kill the products of conception.  But they chant “Put your hands on my body” when they want the government-sanctioned right to free contraception.

Go figure.

Liberal women see no inconsistency in demanding control of other people’s money because they have no control over their own money, much less their own bodies.

I was ahead of the spin curve on this, my friends, and it almost cost me dearly.

Recall that I previously dealt with the controversy of the Obama administration’s demand that all employers, including those having a Biblically informed religious conscience, pay for all forms of contraception of its employees.

At the time I was revelling in my great success in confounding the Americans with mediaswirlification around “women’s rights” and “religious liberties.”

But what everyone was missing was my main goal in this, which went to the heart of freedom!  Yes, everyone seemed to be missing the fact that a modern dictator was dictating to private entities what they must provide free to others.

The dictator was dictating that other people must, based on His Dictateness alone, pay for the sex needs of all women everywhere, including one Ms. Sandra Fluke, a 30-year-old privileged law student going to one of the most expensive law schools in the country.

In a fit of pride, I gloated a rhetorical question: “Where are the sane Americans?”

Remember?

And then I asked this fateful question:

Where is someone to stand up and tell Ms. Keely and Ms. Sandra to stop begging for someone else’s money and control their own friggin’ bodies or go pay for their own damn birth control?

Well, that’s when my luck turned, and out of nowhere surfaced One Sane American.

My fit of pride became fit to be tied as I listened daily for the next week or so as One Rush Limbaugh, a seemingly singular voice of sanity, picked up on my tactic and drove home the point daily: this issue is bigger than “women” and “religion;” it goes to the heart of FREEDOM.

Blechhhh!

Did someone leak my kingdom strategy to Mr. Limbaugh?

Of course someone did.

But what was I to do?  Mr. Limbaugh has an audience of millions, an engaging (sometimes enraging) style, and a way of putting the complex into simple terms that anyone but liberals can understand.

He is Conservative One, and he nailed this one: on what basis should taxpayers or insurers (i.e., other people) be required to pay for women’s recreational (and apparently uncontrollable) sex needs?

I recall one of Mr. Limbaugh’s more lucid analogies.  He imagined a neighbor knocking at his door and telling him that she didn’t have any money for birth control.  And then, after getting a “so what?” look from him, he imagined her telling him that she wanted him to pay for her birth control.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

But that is exactly what Ms. Fluke is doing.

Exactly.

Ms. Fluke is knocking on every American’s door and demanding that they pay her so she can go get contraception to have all the sex she wants with guys who are apparently getting all the free sex they want.

And I was truly worried that Mr. Limbaugh’s golden microphone might blow my stratetacticification.

And then. . .

Oh, am I one lucky devil.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Mr. Limbaugh, in trying to illustrate absurdity said what many were thinking–paying for Ms. Fluke’s lack of self-control and sex life?  What does that make her??

What do you call women who have no self-control in the area of sex, and take other people’s money for it?

But, of course, the days when loose women were shamed are long gone.

Now, Ms. Fluke’s parents are supposed to be proud of her.

Hey, I know I am.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And Mr. Limbaugh?

Well, he flew a little too close to the flame.

Conservative One, meet Liberal One.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

(Oh, but he’ll be back.)

Blechhhh!

It’s a Riot! My Generation Coming of Age

Posted in common sense, democracy, freedom, God, liberals, political correctness, progressives, secularism, toleration, worldview with tags , , on August 10, 2011 by devilbloggger

Riots.

Hey, do you know what you get when you raise a child with no noble expectations, no responsibilities, no moral bearings, and no truth about a God who matters in life?  You get what is called in today’s UK Mail a “feral child”.  Down here we call them “humans raised without knowledge of the true God.”

Yes, my servants, we are watching with delight down here as the world begins to reap what it sewed: irresponsible, dependent, lazy, conscienceless youth, raised to respect nothing and expect everything, except what they need.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

It’s a beautiful sight.

Max Hastings said it best in today’s UK MailOnline in an article entitled, “Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters.”

The title says it all. 

I couldn’t be more proud.

You see, my servants, let me impart some kingdom knowledge.   This is confidential, so keep it between you and me.  Mr. Hastings is exactly right; liberal dogma is my lie, and my lie is like candy–sweet to the mouth but it will make you sick.  Liberal policies always seem right, fair, and noble.  But in the end they produce, well, amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalized youngsters.

Yes, it’s a beautiful thing.  And it’s coming to a town near you.

You see, my servants, it is too late to stop the tidal wave of violence bearing down on Western societies.  At least two generations of people have been indoctrinated in liberal policies, meaning at least millions upon millions of people expect something for nothing and will use violence to protect the status quo.

It’s too late, UK. 

It’s too late, Europe.

It’s too late Central and South America.

And, my favorite, it’s too late America.

You believed my lies.  Only prayer and repentance to God can stop my agenda now, and Western societies are beyond such backward remedies.

Like I said, I couldn’t have said it any better than Mr. Hastings, so let’s look at some of his observations and see if you can see me in all this (I”ll help). 

Speaking specifically of my work in London over the last few days, he remarks:

The people who wrecked swathes of property, burned vehicles and terrorised communities have no moral compass to make them susceptible to guilt or shame.

(That’s me.)

They are illiterate and innumerate, beyond maybe some dexterity with computer games and BlackBerries.

(That’s me.)

They are essentially wild beasts. I use that phrase advisedly, because it seems appropriate to young people bereft of the discipline that might make them employable; of the conscience that distinguishes between right and wrong.

(That’s me.)

They respond only to instinctive animal impulses — to eat and drink, have sex, seize or destroy the accessible property of others.

(That’s me.)

Their behaviour on the streets resembled that of the polar bear which attacked a Norwegian tourist camp last week. They were doing what came naturally and, unlike the bear, no one even shot them for it.

(That’s me, except for the failure to shoot them.)

The depressing truth is that at the bottom of our society is a layer of young people with no skills, education, values or aspirations. They do not have what most of us would call ‘lives’: they simply exist.

(That’s me.)

The notions of doing a nine-to-five job, marrying and sticking with a wife and kids, taking up DIY or learning to read properly, are beyond their imaginations.

(That’s me.)

These kids are what they are because nobody makes them be anything  different or better.

(That’s me.)

From an early stage, feral children discover that they can bully fellow pupils at school, shout abuse at people in the streets, urinate outside pubs, hurl litter from car windows, play car radios at deafening volumes, and, indeed, commit casual assaults with only a negligible prospect of facing rebuke, far less retribution.

(That’s me.)

The breakdown of families, the pernicious promotion of single motherhood as a desirable state, the decline of domestic life so that even shared meals are a rarity, have all contributed importantly to the condition of the young underclass.

(That’s me.)

This has ultimately been sanctioned by Parliament, which refuses to accept, for instance, that children are more likely to prosper with two parents than with one, and that the dependency culture is a tragedy for those who receive something for nothing.

(That’s me.)

They have no code of values to dissuade them from behaving anti-socially or, indeed, criminally, and small chance of being punished if they do so.  They have no sense of responsibility for themselves, far less towards others, and look to no future beyond the next meal, sexual encounter or TV football game.

(That’s me.)

You get the idea.  Liberal ideas, as Mr. Hastings points out, makes victims of a “perverted ethos, which elevates personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the underclass the discipline — tough love — which alone might enable some of its members to escape from the swamp of dependency in which they live.”

And best of all, Mr. Hastings, for all his insight, misses one key point: the proper solution.  Mr. Hastings says:

Only education — together with politicians, judges, policemen and teachers with the courage to force feral humans to obey rules the rest of us have accepted all our lives — can provide a way forward and a way out for these people.

But it’s not education, at least not the kind of education served up in the West these days, that will change the human heart.  And it’s not politicians, judges, policemen and teachers “forcing” feral humans to obey that will solve this problem. 

After all, isn’t that what we have today — policemen forcing feral humans to obey?

Can’t everyone see that the West is headed for life in a police state?

Yes, a police state can control the actions of feral humans.  But a police state can never change the heart of a feral human.  And until hearts are changed, no amount of “education” will help.

Well, I’ve probably said too much now.  Again, keep this confidential, my servants.  But know that absent a moral compass in the heart of a child, the child will make his or her own right and wrong.  Combine this amoral person with a generation of like persons, most of which enjoy the luxury of being a tax-funded freeloader on society, and you have the makings of a riot.

I hope the non-feral humans never find this out.

Keep it quiet, please?

How to make an atheist cross

Posted in atheism, atheists, cross of Christ, False religion, freedom, multiculturalism, political correctness, politics, religion, separation of church and state, theology, toleration, Truth with tags , , on July 27, 2011 by devilbloggger

Cross.

You know I hate crosses, don’t you?  Crosses represent everything that I oppose, everything that I despise, everything that I wish I could change but cannot.  Crosses represent the one act, the one event, the one person of ultimate life.  O Death, where is my sting?

Blechhh!

Fortunately for my kingdom, me and mine are not the only beings in the universe who hate crosses.  One other class of beings also hates the cross, a class of humans who believe in disbelief, have a different faith, and hate the cross: atheists.

Humans are the only kind of being in the entire universe who can believe God does not exist; all other beings know the truth.  All other beings in Heaven and Hell are theists.

In fact, atheists also know the truth.  That’s why they try so hard to disbelieve

Do you know who theists write about? 

Right!  God.

Do you know who atheists write about? 

Right again!  God!

Why do atheists spend so much time thinking, writing, speaking, and generally fulminating about God?  Do atheists spend equal amounts of time and anguish insisting Bigfoot does not exist?

So it was with some amusement, my servants, when I read today’s article at CNN entitled, “Atheist group wants to stop World Trade Center cross.”  Apparently, the perpetually agitated became downright cross over the notion of displaying a cross at the World Trade Center memorial of the 9/11 terror attack.

The CNN article explains:

The World Trade Center cross, two intersecting steel beams that held up when the twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001, is seen as iconic to some.

No, iconic to all, apparently, even our not-so-tolerant protectors of tolerance, the Godhaters.

What’s a good group of cross agitators to do when agitated by a cross in America?

Right! Sue, baby, sue!

America the sue-tiful!

Yes, my servants, the American Atheists filed a lawsuit this week in state court in New York claiming the “government enshrinement of the cross was an impermissible mingling of church and state.”

Of course, the American Atheists only consider “church” to include a belief in God.  This is because they are fools.  There are plenty of recognized religions/churches that hold to atheism as their theology.  Everyone knows this.  Even atheists claim religion status when it is convenient.  Here is one example.

Hey, I wonder if American Christians can sue to have crosses placed everywhere, because to not display a cross an impermissible mingling of atheistic church and state.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You see, my servants, the state will always promote a religion.  It may be a theistic religion.  It may be an atheistic religion.  But church and state are necessarily “mingled” at every level.

Why do I care?  Well, it’s because atheists are also asatanists; they do not believe in moi.  And to tell the truth, that hurts a bit.  To try so hard to impact their lives with lies.  To see them believe my lies and reap the consequences.  To see them curse God instead of me.  Or to see them simply ignore God and me.  It just makes me a little irritated to get no credit for impacting their lives in such visible, tangible ways.

This must be how God feels. 

I suppose it’s not all bad.  At least I get to spend eternity with them.  God doesn’t.

So let’s take a look at these brainiac American Atheists.  To show you how darkened minds think, minds filled with hate and intolerance at those whom they believe hateful and intolerant, let’s take a peek at the American Atheists’ “Religion” page, and see what we can find out about these religionists.

Consider this gem of intellectual brilliance:

Religion spreads like disease through societies, rarely coexisting with pre-existing mythologies, rather preferring to conquer or be conquered. Religion is anything but tolerant.

And you, my servant American Atheists, do you co-exist with mythologies?  Don’t you prefer to conquer?  Are you tolerant?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Try this:

Religion is malicious, malevolent, and unworthy of respect.

Uh … it may be just moi, but you are coming across as overtly malicious, blatantly malevolent, and, quite frankly, entirely unworthy of respect.

Sorry.

And then, to show they know nothing about physics, the American Fools say this:

Atheism, the absence of religion, is the only “ism” that obeys the laws of physics. 

Really?  Tell me, Atheist Einstein, why is there something instead of nothing, and how does your answer obey the laws of physics?

Ha ha ha ha ha. (Most atheists don’t even understand this question, and won’t even try.  But when understood, the question highlights the atheists necessary faith in a godless miracle.  Shhhh …)

Hey, Lamesteins, where do “laws” that must be obeyed come from in the first place?

(Never mind the fact that “isms” don’t obey anything, atheist idiots.  Matter and energy obey the laws of physics.  “isms” merely express faith in an explanation of an unseen and unprovable physical event of the creation of matter and energy.  In both cases, theistic and atheistic, this explanation embodies the believer’s necessary faith).

In fact, my friends, atheism is a religion (at least legally in the United States), or it is the theology of godless religions like Religious Humanism (which all atheists are, whether they know it or not).

But back to the issue of the cross.  My servants, even though atheists rub me the wrong way because they are also asatanists, I must support them in their efforts at eliminating all crosses from public view.

It’s time that everyone put down their crosses and stop following Christ.  It’s time that the symbol of all that is good in the universe, the symbol of victory over death, the symbol of my ultimate defeat, the symbol of a functionally peaceful society, the symbol of a common cultural understanding, the symbol of help in time of need, the symbol of mercy and grace, the symbol of hope in a dying world, the symbol of . . .

Oh, gag me.

Just support the atheist fools on this one, my servants.  Please?

Now I’m cross as well.

Declaration of Dependence

Posted in freedom, liberty with tags , , on July 4, 2011 by devilbloggger

Independence.

Today my American servants celebrate Independence Day, my friends.  On this day in 1776 the early Americans who were subject to King George of England signed the Declaration of Independence.  Declaring in writing their right and duty to “throw off absolute despotism,” those Yankees did just that.

And they did it in style.

A style that had me very worried, my servants.  Why?  Because I saw clearly that the very underpinnings of the American experiment relied heavily on God and his principles on earth. 

And by “God” I don’t mean America’s present notion of God.  Those early Americans meant God, the real God, the living God, the God who is God by nature, self existing, eternal, transcendent, and to whom every human being must give account.

That God.

Blechhhh!

In the very first sentence of this Declaration, we read about the nature of people, and the “separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them.”

Nature’s God?  Is this really in an official United States of America document?  And penned by the same dude that first wrote “separation of church and state” in an unofficial letter to a friend?

Yes, my servants.  Now you know why I was worried.  A very public God illuminated the thinking in that document, and it got worse.  You know the next phrase, the second sentence of the Declaration which split open the very nether regions of Hell before ringing throughout eternity:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

What can I say?  Those early American rebels relied on an eternal truth.  A truth memorialized in writing; a writing setting out the basis for independence; and an independence that threatened my very existence in the New World.

What was I to do?  That first Fourth of July reminded me of a more eternal and permanent independence available to all. 

I knew that if men were free to hear the gospel they would hear of the one who is the way, the truth, and the life.

Life!

I knew that if men could hear truth the truth would set them free.

Liberty!

I knew that if men yielded to the voice of the only one who is truly and absolutely independent, that no one could steal their joy.

Pursuit of happiness!

My only option was to pervert independence, my servants.  I knew that I must make independence absolute in the eyes of men, so that they chaffed under absolute moral authority and accepted a false independence: independence from one perceived as an absolute despot–God.

Men rejected God as a moral despot, and in so doing traded true independence for a corrosive dependence that manifests as moral relativism; toleration in which every man does what is right in his own eyes.

Abortion is wrong?  Who says?

Homosexuality is wrong?  Who says?

Adultery is wrong?  Who says?

Stealing from another by letting the government take from the working to give to the idle is wrong?  Who says?

Denying God’s proper place in public discourse is wrong?  Who says?

Cursing God and using his name in vain is wrong?  Who says?

You get the idea, my servants.  And my plan worked perfectly.  My American servants have almost completely thrown off that easy yoke of God-honoring, authority-recognizing, publicly visible cultural discourse.

And instead they have taken another yoke.  And do you know whose it is?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You got it!  Because almost everyone is necessarily under authority in morals and discourse.  And when you throw off the authority of God, you are left with the authority of men, which is to say, l’autorité de moi!

And my work is almost complete.  Rather than celebrate a right relationship with God, Americans today act embarrassed about God, treating him like a crazy uncle who is best ignored in private and never spoken of in public.

Imagine, if an American public official penned the Declaration of Independence today he or she would be sued by multiple of my servants for breaching that secularisticly sacred wall of separation of church and state.  God can no longer be mentioned in American public by any government official.

Go ahead, imagine!  (It’s easy if you try.)

The net result, my friends, is that the Americans are slowly sinking into a morass of dependence on a usurping authority, a false independence which manifests itself as an unhealthy dependence on government, a misplaced hope in men, and a surprising new appetite for the despotism of freedom-killing security.

So today, my American servants, I hope you don’t rethink your so-called “independence.”  For while you may be independent from other countries politically, by rejecting the very basis for that independence you ironically daily become more dependent on notions that form the very basis for my kingdom.

After all, I am the ultimate despot and I hold men back from the ultimate liberty, a liberty in Christ.

So today, why not formally declare your dependence on me?  Go out and celebrate Dependence Day, as is fitting under the circumstance.

Oh, and don’t forget to stick around for my fireworks!

%d bloggers like this: