Islam Part 1

Now we begin on the first of several religions that state that the Hebrews of the bible were not Jews, but themselves. "Abraham was not a Jew nor Christian; but an upright Muslim." (Soorah Aal'imraan 3:67) (From their point of view, Muslim means true believer in God, therefore Abraham as a truthful believer in the "one true god" was Muslim by definition, not as a title)

First and foremost in Islam is the belief that There is one true god, Allah, and Muhammad was his prophet. The view Jesus as a prophet, but certainly not as messiah/savior.

Again Islam, founded on Judaism and Christianity inherits their flaws, however considering their views on Jesus as prophet rather than savior, and other changes they make, it would be unfair to judge solely on that, and so we'll focus entirely on the Qur'an.

We of course begin first with the "all powerful god" contradiction (see rule 2 internal consistency) straight forward, and obvious.

Muslims believe in eliminating all anthropomorphisms (human qualities) from Allah who is not at all like man. This violates the Bible which states that "man was created in the image of God"
Islam also denies Jesus' own words when he claimed to be God himself.
The standard argument is that only the Qur'an is uncorrupted by man. No argument is made to explain why the bible was allowed to be corrupted if the Qur'an can not be (or at least has not been).

Let's start with compulsion. Muslims claim to have a peaceful religion, in which they are required not to force others to join them, but to encourage it. We see this supported in the following verse:
"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things," (2:256).

However this is then contradicted:
"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful," (9:5).

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued," (9:29).

The first verse says not to use compulsion (force) to make people worship. The next two say to kill, assault and ambush non Muslims (Pagans and those "people of the book" meaning Jews and Christians). Internal consistency error, in violation of Rule 2 and its own beliefs of inerrancy


and for further inconsistency:
O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper," (5:90).

Truly the Righteous will be in Bliss: On Thrones (of Dignity) will they command a sight (of all things): Thou wilt recognize in their faces the beaming brightness of Bliss. Their thirst will be slaked with Pure Wine sealed," (83:22-25).

Here's my main source.

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) Final Verdict

Posts:
Rules
Part 1
Part 2

Final Verdict: False Religion
Evidence: Fails Internal Consistancy, Fails Truth
Aside from claiming a false lineage of American Indians (claiming they are descended of Jews, rather than Asian nomads) this religion has uncountable problems. I recommend watching the south park episode on Mormonism for a humorous view.
1) dependent on the already debunked Christianity
2)false prophecies
3)Direct contradictions of Christian doctrine
4)The assumption that God would make a law He intended to have broken by man, the unsupported claim that Adam and Eve HAD to eat the forbidden fruit to "Be fruitful and multiply" whereas God never says this.

In closing: (Book of Mormon Ether 15:31)
"And it came to pass that after he had smitten off the head of Shiz, that Shiz raised up on his hands and fell; and after that he struggled for breath, he died."
I think we're done here. Feel free to debate.

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) Part 2

Giving the Mormons a bit of a chance, here's part 2 where we face off against the book of Mormon.

Right from the introduction the book claims that the Native Americans were descendants of Israel. Considering the fact that no Amerindian tradition exists making any such claim and do to the very large gulf between the two systems of belief of Judea and the Americas (which more resemble Australian aboriginal beliefs, and those of ancient Asian tribes) this is already difficult to accept.

Next the book goes on to two testimonies of 3 and 8 witnesses respectively who attest that "they saw the plates the untranslated text was written on." First I think it would've been easier and more sure to keep the plates so they could be seen in the future, and though these witnesses claim they are of "ancient workmanship" they provide no evidence and claim no expertise in such analysis.

From Moroni 8:8
Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.

This is nowhere supported in the bible, not even in the testimony of Jesus that "little children are whole" and not capable of sin, rather the bible insists we are born with sin:
Psalm 51:5
Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Since Mormons claim both these books are God given truth, such contradictions cannot stand.

"The Book of Mormon teaches that the disobedience of Adam and Eve in eating the forbidden fruit was necessary so that they could have children and bring joy to mankind (2 Nephi 2:23-25). In contrast, the Bible specifically declares that Adam's transgression was a sinful act of rebellion that unleashed the power of sin and death in the human heart and throughout God'’s perfect world (Genesis 3:16-19; Romans 5:12; 8:20-21). There is no Biblical support for the view that Adam and Eve could only fulfill the command to "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28) by disobeying God'’s command regarding the forbidden fruit (Genesis 2:17). The Book of Mormon teaching that these divine commands are contradictory, and that God expected Adam and Eve to figure out that in reality He wanted them to break the latter command ("of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it") in order to keep the former ("be fruitful and multiply"), has no basis in logic or the Biblical text, and attributes equivocation to God." --(http://www.irr.org/mit/bombible.html retrieved 6/28/2006)

Click the link above, it shows many other contradictions.

Then there's 2Nephi 10:7 which claims that once Jews believe in Jesus as their savior they will be returned to Israel as a nation. They've returned, but still deny Jesus is their savior. Therefore the result was reached without the "prophetically" required cause. Some Mormons argue that "some Jews" believe, therefore they got some of their land back. There is no prophecy saying this will happen in stages to explain this however. Also this gives them the ever pleasant "timeless" prophecy meaning if it hasn't been fulfilled you can't say its false because it still might be...I remain skeptical and though I'd normally leave the benefit of the doubt if this were all, the earlier arguments lead me to see this as false prophecy.

Then there's Mosiah 18:17 "And they were called the church of God, or the church of Christ, from that time forward." set in 147 BC, this claims that the Christian church was founded in 147 BC, whereas scripture makes clear that
Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
The creation of the church being IN THE FUTURE from Jesus' perspective, about 200 years later than the book of Mormon would have it.

Then there's 2 Nephi 5:26 "And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did consecrate Jacob and Joseph, that they should be priests and teachers over the land of my people." Jacob and Joseph being of the tribe of Manassah. According to the Old Testament however (Numbers 3:9-10) Only those from the tribe of Levi would be made priests.

There are many more such contradictions, but I think I've made my point.

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) Part 1

Based on the 13 articles of faith of the LDS church (Mormons) I make the first argument. Specifically based on articles 1, 3 and 8 show here:

1. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

3. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

8.We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

Based on my earlier arguments against Christianity, this is already false as it is based on the same doctrine (ultimately, the bible)

To their credit they also believe in allowing people to worship as they wish, recognize the authority of government (unlike Jehovah's Witnesses for example who refuse to recognize anything but God) and in doing good to all, regardless of their beliefs. This doesn't make it a true religion however nice it is.

Straightening Out Media Bias

After a little research into a new project (about which I'll be posting here soon) I came across some media reports which just, well, surprised me to put it mildly. Let's just say the media is surprisingly good at hiding it's bias. It's difficult to tell if a subject (or even reporter) has a bias in what they report, especially when using "anonymous" sources.
Therefore, I propose the following: all media personel must report their: ethnicity, religion, cultural background and anything else which might make them biased on anything they've reported. (are they reporting on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? Are they Jewish and once lived for several years in Israel?)
In support of this I've added a little information about myself in my profile's "about me" section. After all, if I'm attacking everyone else's religion I should allow them to see what my own position is and give them the chance to attack mine.

The truth can stand on its own.

America's Future and What Will Be Left of the World

America stands today just about where Great Britain was in 1897. The World's superpower. Back then, Britain controlled 25% of the earths population and 1/5 of its land mass. It's navy was larger than the next two largest navies combined. America's military stands on a similar level today, by far the most powerful in the world. But just like foreign influence (mainly the independence seeking of its colonies and two world wars) put Britain into decline, foreign matters are now doing the same to America. Drawn out around the world, with two wars, a global "police" force with bases around the globe and mired in conflict with a foe with no home, no base and no targets. Add to that the very quickly growing influence of India and China and there's a recipe for disaster. As China grows and expands it's desire for oil, more nations will be selling a higher percent of their production to China who'll be willing to pay for it, meaning America's energy sources will be sorely tested. Global competition for business means the U.S. will either have to surrender industries or lower wages, accompanied with rapidly increasing tuition/educational costs will lead to the first decrease in standard of living for the U.S. since the great depression.
America will decline, it is likely that we are now at the very peak of its greatness. My only fear is that it is to be replaced not with a new western superpower as we replaced Great Britain, but by rising false religions, ignorance, and a new age of global decline. We may very well live through a new depression, with an America inundated with people from nations that can't care for themselves, overwhelming American resources.
It seems the Muslims may now have their shot along side India and China at driving the course of the world. I wonder where we will stand, who have created civilization and who drove the great growth that has allowed the entire world to achieve so much. What indeed will happen to the world itself when it is led by a religion with many extremists, a communist government and a technological powerhouse with over a billion people, nuclear weapons and a grudge against another nation with the same.
The world survived one nuclear standoff between superpowers. Can it survive another? Anyone can see that conflicts and disagreements abound too greatly for any sort of globalist utopia. Our future will undoubtedly see conflict and war. This is inevitable. The question is what kind of world will we leave when we are done. What will remain when the war ends.

To be(lieve) or not to be(lieve)

An argument was brought to my attention that while not wholly applicable to the ongoing discussion on religion here, I find, none the less, to be important to address. Specifically it relates to Pascal's wager. Read the site if you want to fully understand it, but the general idea is that you are better off believing in god than in not.

First, though I've been criticizing, and will continue to do so to, the many religions I have not nor will say that god does not exist. I am saying that these religions can be marked as "true","false" or "indeterminate" but also that such a judgment does not in any way effect an argument about the existence or nature of god or any god-like being.

For the most part I agree that since no rational argument as yet has determined the truth about the existence of god or even provided good suggestion as to which is the way to go, that practical and suggestive arguments do tend to the idea that it is in fact better (that is more personally beneficial) to believe in god then to not.

However, being argumentative as I am I will make a brief statement to encourage debate. Specifically, that if belief in god leads one to a religious system that is false or that encourages or allows behavior which is harmful then indeed belief in god can be more harmful than lack of belief. As example I would point to the doomsday and suicide cults which have been in the popular news over the many years such as the heaven's gate cult.

In any case however the argument again comes down to the system of belief that is adopted being the true culprit while an overall and general belief in god did not in fact cause the harm.

So I feel I've now addressed the argument and left open a debate both for and against it, just to make things difficult. After this: ever onward and upward.

Christianity Final Verdict

Posts:
Rules
Part 1
Part 2

Final Verdict: False Religion
Evidence: Fails Internal Consistency
1)As per Rule 2, A completely omnipotent God is internally inconsistent
2)inaccurate lineages (no blood link between Jesus and Joseph), false history concocted to fulfill false prophecy
3)False prophecy proven unfulfilled

Click here for some more inaccuracies, including some from the mouth of Jesus.
I plan on a more thorough analysis of the entire bible, if I ever find the time. More argument here is, however, unnecessary.

Christianity Pt 2

Daniel's Prophecy

In the book of Daniel, chapter 2 Daniel is faced with the task of not only Interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's Dream, but with also telling what the dream was. In his dream he saw a statue with a head of gold, chest and arms of silver, a belly of brass, legs of iron and feet of iron and clay. A stone destroys the statue and grows into a mountain.

I'll use the most commonly accepted meanings for the statue.
the gold head, as stated in the verse itself, undisputedly represents the Babylonian Empire under Nebuchadnezzar. There's no discrepancy there.

Second is the chest and arms of silver, usually said to represent the Persian Empire, the successor to Babylonia. Again, no discrepancy

Third is the belly of brass accepted to be the Greek empire starting with Alexander. Here we run into the first problem.
In Daniel 2:39: "And after you there will rise another kingdom inferior to you; and another kingdom, a third one, of copper, that will rule over the whole earth."
It very clearly states that this empire will rule over the whole earth. No empire in history has accomplished this. The closest was the British Empire much later, but even that failed to control the entire Earth.

Fourth is the legs of iron, accepted to be the Roman empire. The roman empire split into its eastern and western halves is represented in the transition from body to legs.
In Daniel 2:40: "And as for the fourth kingdom, it will prove to be strong like iron. Forasmuch as iron is crushing and grinding everything else, so, like iron that shatters, it will crush and shatter even all these." Indeed the Roman empire surpasses the previous ones mentioned, but it certainly could not be said to "crush" the world-encompassing empire depicted.

Finally the feet of iron and clay. This one is believed to be in the future, often considered to be the European Union. This would be a logical successor to the Roman Empire and consists of several nations (iron) united only loosely (the clay). The failure of the EU constitution however has put a damper on this notion for the time being.

While most of this prophecy seems fine, the part about the world-encompassing empire is clearly wrong. Even if you consider it to be referring to the Greek culture, which certainly spread throughout the western world, it has not reached the entire planet. The influence of the Greek empire never reached the far east or sub-Saharan Africa, nor the Australian aborigines or the Americas until their conquest by the European powers. Even today parts of South America, Africa, Asia and the Pacific have not been influenced by Helenistic ideas. No empire in history has had this reach, and if we are supposed to be passed this stage (as all scholars and believers agree) This prophecy is false.

Christianity Pt 1

Being founded on Judaism, which has already been shown to be a false religion we could easily just dismiss this as false as well. All the arguments against Judaism effect aspects which are part of the Christian religions as well.

However, in the spirit of giving the benefit of the doubt, this will focus on those beliefs specific to Christianity. This covers Evangelical, Catholic, Christian and Jehovah's Witnesses as defined earlier.

Matthew 1:18-19
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations. Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

-This first chapter implies Jesus is of the line of David. It lays out the lineage from David to Joseph. It also make clear the child is not Joseph's but Mary's by way of God...Therefore Jesus is NOT of the line of David (He does not share that blood) as that would have to come down through his mother's line. According to all human tradition you are only of a lineage descended through your human parents, therefore even if God is all powerful he cannot make the child of the line of David except through a descendant of the line of David (ie Joseph).

-Assuming the child was born without male intervention, then genetically it would have required the child to be a female as his mother could provide no Y chromosome. We will assume God intervened in this one and let it go however (but see the note on rule two, all powerful God creating internal consistency problems) We'll also accept the virgin birth as allowable by God's intervention

Matthew 1:21
And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
- he shall save HIS people... taking this literally it could mean nothing other then Jews. From the old testament tradition (and all other human traditions) a person's "people" were his kin and extended from that the group or nation he belonged to and identified with. Later verses clearly show this to be the Jews. Therefore Jesus is out to save the Jews (which is where he begins in any case) and according to the literal word of God (this is God speaking in this verse) only the Jews and noone else's salvation is mentioned. (note that a literal understanding says Joseph knew not his wife UNTIL she gave birth to Jesus...implying he did "know" her after)

Matthew 2:16
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.
-My problems with this are historical. Herod's reign was fairly well documented by the historian Josephus who described many of Herod's atrocities, but this one is never mentioned. Nor is there any historical evidence (ie mass graves/scattered graves of murdered children) to suggest a large number of children were killed. This also seems less likely when considering it is a re-creation of Moses' birth and the slaughter of the Jewish children to prevent his rising to lead the Jewish people from Egypt. All evidence points to this being theological fiction with the intention of "fulfilling" an old testament prophecy(Jer31:15) that never came true.
Josephus is known to have despised Herod, and took pleasure in noting every atrocity attributed to him. He would certainly not have let such a one as murdering children go unnoted. This implies the story was written after Josephus' time and this "crime" was not known by anyone until after Herod's time. This seems odd as it would be easier to discover and document then Herod's murder of his own family members.
Thus the lack of any mention by Josephus and the complete lack of even the suggestion of such an event by any other source (Greek, Roman or Jewish) forces a simple conclusion: This never happened.
Since one prophecy regarding the "Messiah" is false it leads one to wonder about the others supposedly (and so conveniently) fulfilled by Jesus.


With this many discrepancies in just the first two chapters of the first book of the new testament I hardly need to go on...
Feel free to argue.

Judaism Final Verdict

Posts:
Rules
Part 1

Final Verdict: False Religion
Evidence: Fails Internal Consistency
1) As per Rule 2, A completely omnipotent God is internally inconsistant
2) God commands violation of his own laws (See Ex34, Ex25:18) (Against creating idols)
3)God commands violation of his own laws
(See Ex34, Ex22:19, Ex20:17, Ex31:15, Lev20:9, Lev20:27, 2Chron15:12-13, Deut13:13-18, Is14:21)(Against murder)

Here's a website that lists more. They're clearly biased, but the references are valid.

Judaism pt 1

We'll begin with Judaism as it leads quite logically into Christianity and Islam.

Analysis here can be difficult due to the wide range of interpretations and analysis offered but we're going to stick to basics, the Hebrew Bible (Christian Old Testament) .

While we could engage in endless debate about Genesis, I shall here and for all other religions be generous and stick to only that which can be reasonably defended with hope of resolution.

Lets look right into Exodus (ואלה שמות) One significant event is when God proclaims the Israelites His people because he set them free out of his (oddly limited) omnipotence...wherein a whole series of earthly events must occur rather then God just making it happen. This supposedly all powerful being already contradicts our rules (See rule 2 on internal consistency violated by premise of all-powerful God)

But lets add a little more fuel to our fire before drawing our conclusions...

Let's see the 10 commandments (Ex34:28 / DT10:4):

1. "I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery. Thou shalt have no other gods besides Me... .."
   • No Problems here
     
2. "Do not make a sculpted image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above..."
   • Here I do see a problem. God says not to make sculpted images or any likeness of what's in the heavens or on the earth... Yet when God commands the creation of the ark of the covenant he specifies the creation of the images of two Cherubim (angels) to be placed upon it(Ex 25:18 - And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them, in the two ends of the mercy seat.). Thus GOD COMMANDS VIOLATION OF HIS OWN LAW.
     
3. "Thou shalt not swear falsely by the name of the LORD..."
   • Again, no problems here.
4. "Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy"
   • Again, no problems here.
5. "Thou shalt honour your father and your mother..."
   • Don't know enough off hand, I'll look into it, for now I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say no problems.
     
6. "Thou shalt not kill"
   • I do assume this means only cold blooded murder and does not refer to self defense and (obviously) not the slaughter of animals. Violation of this is repeatedly commanded by God in the bible.
     
   • Ex20:17 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"
     
   • Ex22:19 "Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed."
     
   • Ex31:15 "whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
   • Lev20:9 "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him"
   • Lev20:27 "A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them."
   • 2Chron15:12-13 "And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."

   • Deut13:13-18 "Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God."

7. "Thou shalt not commit adultery."
   • no problems
     
8. "Thou shalt not steal."
   • I've had this mentioned to me as "do not kidnap" since stealing is not a "capitol" offense... but in either case, no problem.
     
9. "Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor"
   • no problem (though I do question this...I have no evidence)
     
10. "Thou shalt not covet your neighbor's house...
• no problem

To sum up a little, if you worship another god, practice a different religion not only are you condemned to die, but the entire city in which you live and all who live there must be destroyed...Yes kill innocent people because they live in the same city as someone who worships a different god. Thou shalt not kill...unless you can find a way to do so in the name of God.

So... in just the second book of the Bible we find three internal consistency problems. I think this case is closed. Feel free to argue, we are after the truth here after all.

A Plethora of Religion

Let's face it, our world is inundated with religions and for any seeker trying to learn about them and find themselves the "truth" there can be much confusion. In my earlier post I laid out the 3 fundamental laws of truth for religion. Any true religion must obey these three laws. This will be the start of a series analyzing all religions based on these laws (as well as others discovered as we go along) Hopefully coming to some sort of conclusion or at least clearing up the field a bit. As we begin here's a list of religions (using the term loosely) which will be analyzed.
Added to the three laws will be a (sometimes tentative) analysis as to the groups goals and whether the system can (or likely will) succeed at achieving them. (A belief system that can be found entirely incapable of achieving it's stated goals would undoubtedly be false based on the fact that if the religion were true it would have at least a chance of success. An example would be a cult that believes it's members by chopping off their limbs will learn to fly).

Judaism [1]
Evangelical Christian (defined as Christians who claim the bible is 100% literal)
Christian (all other Christians except Catholics)
Catholics
Jehovah's Witnesses
Mormons (Latter Day Saints)
Islam
Christian Identity
Christian Science
Scientology
Gnosticism
Sikhism
Hinduism
Buddhism
Taoism
Shinto
Zoroastrianism
Amerindian indigen (beliefs of American Indian Indigenous Tribes)
Druidism
Celtic Paganism
Witchcraft (Wicca)
Odinism (Asatru)
GreccoRoman pantheism
Aborigine (Beliefs of Australian aborigines)
Baha'i
Confucianism
Jainism
Vodun (Voodoo)
Cult of Isis (Goddess worship)
Santeria (also Cult of Elian)
Hare Krishna
Gypsies
Satanism
Unitarian-Universalism
Creativity Movement
Goth
New Age
Kabalah
Lucifarans (Cult of Lucifer)
Cult of Silence

Finally so that this post is more then just a list I will answer a much discussed question among Christians, which is "Is faith more important than doing good works?"
The answer is that the two go together. Anyone of true faith will do good upon the earth and thus with faith you get both. You can do good without faith however; therefore faith is more important then good works, as you will never have (true) faith and a lack of good works.

Trade Freedom for Security and You'll Get Neither

5 years, 2 wars and hundreds of promises of better security (at the expense of our freedoms) and the U.S. is no safer then it was.
55 illegal immigrants were caught, all of whom were working at ONE airport.
So really all any terrorist needs to do to get on a plane is go to Mexico, sneak into the U.S. pretending to be Mexican, get some fake id and other documents and apply for a job at any place they want to attack. If millions of Mexicans can do it, why not a dozen fairly well-trained and funded terrorists?

On the other hand, there is some news that makes sense regarding (legal) immigrants...
146 of those who joined our military are being granted citizenship. They come from 50 different countries.

Borg Dreams: Antarctic Log: Entry #1

- Explanation -

TOP SECRET

Due to files on board the alien craft we were able to translate a great deal of their language quite easily. It is in fact mathematical and references objects like part numbers in a catalogue, so once you know the number it’s easy. Other words were a bit more difficult but using some cryptanalysis techniques and computer analysis relating back to the available data and on board references most has been interpreted.

We have no information that would help determine their time and dating systems yet, though it seems to operate on a base 128 system measuring in units approximately 3/8 of a second. This is quite likely incorrect as there are still anomolies not explained by these assumptions.

Original text translations are in black, comments are in red.

42-202@#%sdg34750261-295u#(@&!
( This data believed to be some sort of dating system not yet translated)

Condition Assessment: non-functional /
Navigation: 80% ………. Scheduled for recycle
Communications: 0% … Needs repair
Propulsion: 0% ………... Vital, Needs repair
Life Support: 8% ……… Vital, Needs repair
Weapons: 36% ………... Scheduled for recycle
Crew: 60% (30/50) ……. Scheduled for partial recycle

There was some 100 lines of corrupted data here we could not translate

42-202@#%sdg34750261-295u*x73 (Seems to be a new entry, End of entry code from last entry must have been part of the garbled message)

Condition Assessment: Minimal functionality. Recoverable.
Communications: 10% … Minimal functionality
Propulsion: 20% ……….. Minimal functionality
Life Support: 26% ……... Sustainable (a3281#Life Support: 26% ……... Sustainable (a3281#Life Support: 26% ……... Sustainable (a3281#Life Support: 26% ……... Sustainable (a3281#$&@) (Believed to be duration of time)
Crew: 6% (3/50) .……… Minimal functionality

…..Transmissions detected.
Frequency: 300MHz – 30PHz
Encoding: unknown
Source: unknown/artificial
Location: d:~200u +10q+72h (Units are believed to be u= generic unit: distance from sun to first planet q = some notation relating to angle from solar plane, h some distance along orbital trajectory relative to unknown fixed point)

Receipt of signal implies existance of necessary resources for repairs, setting course…
?????????: 14&3#

---NOTES-------------------

Though much of the equipment discovered was damaged, including much of the logs (which seems to include any logs made about the events causing the damage) we believe this to be the borg’s first notice of our existance. It also seems obvious now what, or dare I say, who caused this damage. It is interesting that the borg not only sacrificed non essential systems to repair the more important ones, but also sacrificed much of their crew to do so. Better that a few survive then all perish I suppose. It also suggests either high compatability between components of many systems or an ability to create highly complex pieces of equipment as needed. We currently believe it to be the latter, though the mechanism for this is unknown.

Neil C at Pisces

Real bad pic of Neil Cavanagh playing at Pisces.
good music though.
I'll try to bring my digital camera from now on instead of using the one on my phone.
Although it is cool being able to post to the blog from my cell phone.