Hell Paradigm

The first part of this was an e-mail titled The Hell Factor that I sent last 11-17 to "mainstream" news publications mostly in the US:

As screwed up as the human race is, one might ask, "How could planet Earth be anything but a Hell?" Well, the planet and all living things inhabiting it are biodiverse beauty, Creation, perfection in their own way. It's only human "civilization" as we know it that's entirely too hellish. Humans are, more than anything else, the product of environment - the sum of the education allowed by the powers that (currently) be. There's nothing naturally or intrinsically evil about (at least the vast majority of) humans. Evil is taught, programmed; overtly or subtlely. And government by official secrecy is the engine that promotes the ignorance that causes the astronomical (to put it mildly) level of evil we know today.

I'm not saying I believe it's possible to eliminate evil altogether, though for all we know for certain, perhaps it is. This isn't about the overt, obvious evil many people do. This is about the high price of the ignorance of the enablers. "Evil thrives by good people doing nothing."

If there's only one adjective to describe the human race of today, mine would be atheistic. That's referring to the presently dominant political, religious and economic/industrial "leadership" and the legions of those who support them. Atheism, in my opinion, has nothing to do with one's beliefs; only actions and inactions. One can reject entirely the notion of a Supreme Being or Creator of the Universe or whatever and still not be an atheist. And one can be the most devout (or fanatic) follower of whatever religion and be a total atheist. What all atheists have in common is a lack of love for or concern with people - or group(s) or type(s) of people - and/or the ecosystem. They're anti-Creation.

Atheism is also the denial of reason, facts, new knowledge that would advance science and expand consciousness, however huge a shock to the system such facts likely will be initially. Creation/Nature gave us a brain to use; not to blindly follow whatever dogma or doctrine that does nothing for the improvement of mankind - or real, substantial improvement... There's no good reason for the mainstream media (therefore the government) to deny and ignore the various (presently) unexplained phenomena they way they/you do. We need all the new science we can get that even might improve the ecological and sociological conditions. Neither are healthy enough to warrant the gargantuan (to put it mildly) absence of truth.

We simply can and must eliminate or vastly reduce the Hell factor. Expect the unexpected. Know that objective truth doesn't always, if ever, conform to egocentric (including religious) expectations... Government by official secrecy is simply (or at least primarily) wrong. Now is the time to prove freedom of speech actually exists in America (for example). (11-17-06)

Whoa, how overly-diplomatic and understated I was. For one thing, I don't use the term "mainstream media" any more. They're the currently dominant media.

Human life as we know it is a far greater Hell than any conceivable afterlife one because of a little concept called reality. We see the rotten fruits of it daily. We're presently controlled by de facto demons... The burden of proof is on the monotheistic religious nuts as to whether or not there's any kind of single Absolute Monarch of Evil and/or Absolute Monarch of Everything concerning humanity/Earth. And reasonable people need to start holding their feet to the fire in the strongest way yet for said proof. Otherwise, everything is science as usual; no excitement/hysteria.

Religion is psychosis perhaps primarily in its expectation of perfection. Again, very strong burden of proof is on the "true believers" for the existence of such a notion. Otherwise the idea of a Perfect God is only rote parroting like automatons. Those familiar with the Borg of the latter Star Trek series might make the same obvious comparison: The (entirely evil) Borg are also obsessed with perfection.

Or the burden of proof of perfection (being possible in the human personality) is on whatever nonhuman power that can demonstrate it, even if we wouldn't understand it upon its disclosure.

Speaking of Star Trek, I refer to the last part of the first entry. It seems too many people (religious and secular), consciously or not, believe they're doing "God's Will" by not desiring and militantly ignoring the very idea of Contact/advancement of science as being part of the Prime Directive, if you will - the policy of strict non-intervention. They couldn't be more wrong. Coming from humans, ignorance of reality, however undefined much of it now is, amounts to only atheism... in the only-actions-speak sense defined above. One can reject the g word and still use atheist as a pejorative. (10-18)

Our community needs to, for the first time ever, make the burden of proof a real burden to the burdened. It's inevitable; just a question of when. (10-26)