13th November 2012

“The Vatican has orchestrated a conspiracy of secrecy about child abuse for decades, if not centuries.”

Marci A. Hamilton

11 Responses to “13th November 2012”

  1. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    …for no purpose greater than concealing the truth that Catholicism is a false front for institutionalized pedophilia.

    Man boy love has been around since long before the time of Christ and it as always been offensive to the great majority of people.

    This cult of pedophiles has in religion created the most effective scheme for concealing their perversions.

    Ordinary people look aghast at some of the vows: celibacy, silence, et cetera. It is only when you frame this lifestyle within the context of organized pedophilia that it starts to make sense.

    Even the Christ myth is built upon the lifestyle of the pedophile where the Egyptian god of darkness Set (think sunset or Satan) penetrates the anus of the young Horus (horizon or Jesus son/sun of god) and spills his seed. That they lie together as lovers.

    The Phallas as a symbol of man exists in many cultures but in Catholicism it is built around the pope. The pope wears a phallic cap upon his head and a thick ornate robe to create the image of himself as a large thick penis.

    The popes verbal ejaculations are splattered all over the masses in a display of master and submissive.

  2. RJ Says:

    the vatican and its church is filled with fools.

  3. Jeff Says:

    Off Subject for today:

    I’m about to send the following to President Obama concerning his second inaugural. It is a request that he consider dropping the words “So Help Me God” from the end of the oath, returning to the one which is Constitutionally mandated:

    “About 90% of Americans think that I’m nuts for this, but I am an Atheist. By the way, sir, I’d like to thank you for the acknowledgement of my existence in the salutation from your first inaugural address. With your reelection, it is my hope you will take it a bit further, and discuss with Chief Justice Roberts his administering the oath in the constitutionally mandated form, (see Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 8) without those pernicious four words added at the end by our first President, and slavishly repeated by all who followed. I believe that the addition of those four words, which I cannot speak without lying, converts the oath to a religious test that is specifically banned by the Constitution you are swearing to uphold per Article VI, Paragraph 3. Since we are to be fortunate enough for you to take the oath a second (oops – that makes three, doesn’t it?) time, please consider correcting this, explain it in the inaugural address, and let the right roar – after all, you won’t be running for anything again, and they’ll have four years to get over it.

    Let me explain why you should care: this is nothing less than a civil rights issue, and it is just as important, and applies to the almost the same percentage of the population, as those for which Mrs. Parks sat down. The only difference is that we don’t wear our status on our skin. Let me explain.

    In 1971 & 72, while Mr. Nixon was engineering the Democratic nomination for president, I was named a National Merit Scholarship Finalist. As such, I received an invitation from my congressman to consider applying for one of his appointments to the service academies. I considered it long and hard. But sir, I had come to my beliefs at about 15 years of age, and I am a conscientious atheist (some on the far right of the Christian faith would say that such is a contradiction in terms, of course. Our draft laws at the time made it impossible as well.). See Title 10, Section 502 of the US Code and you will see that while some military regulations consider it optional, Congress, in 1960, did not. I could not take that oath, as required, and therefore could not consider the military as a career option, regardless of my preference, which, at the time strongly leaned in that direction. To take the oath, as required, would constitute beginning my service to my country with a lie. This is something I will not do. Given the path my life has taken since, I doubt that I would have been a good officer – but I deserved the chance to find out. Of course, if that same Mr. Nixon had not stopped the draft shortly after my 18th birthday, I would have faced a quite different sort of peril.

    I cannot consider a civil service job either. See 5 U.S.C. §3331 for the Civil Service oath. It’s exactly the same problem, but this dates back to 1884. I cannot become a Justice of the Supreme Court. Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 precludes me from taking that oath. The oath for Congressional service likewise excludes me. Since the Vice President’s oath is the same as the Congressional one, I can’t even consider that “warm pitcher of spit” position. (Please, don’t tell Mr. Bidden I said that!)

    I have stood mute on each occasion when the Pledge of Allegiance is said, and the Supreme Court has ruled that this is my only option. They seem to forget the meaning of the words, “sovereign citizen of the United States”. At base, it means that that flag belongs to ME in exactly the same way the standard which flies over Buckingham Palace when she is in residence belongs to Queen Elizabeth II. They’ve taken that away.

    Now for a real goody: the juror’s oath in the State of Ohio. Ohio Revised Code, Title XXIX, Chapter 2945.25:

    (A) In criminal cases jurors and the jury shall take the following oath to be administered by the trial court or the clerk of the court of common pleas, and the jurors shall respond to the oath “I do swear” or “I do affirm” : “Do you swear or affirm that you will diligently inquire into and carefully deliberate all matters between the State of Ohio and the defendant (giving the defendant’s name)? Do you swear or affirm you will do this to the best of your skill and understanding, without bias or prejudice? So help you God.”

    A juror shall be allowed to make affirmation and the words “this you do as you shall answer under the pains and penalties of perjury” shall be substituted for the words, “So help you God.”

    (B) If, on or after the effective date of this amendment, a court that impanels a jury in a criminal case uses the oath that was in effect prior to the effective date of this amendment instead of the oath set forth in division (A) of this section, the court’s use of the former oath does not invalidate or affect the validity of the impanelment of the jury or any action taken by the jury.

    In other words, a believer is taken at his oath to the God which I believe to be false, but I have to threaten myself with perjury with my own mouth. Over my dead body, sir. Either everyone takes the second form, or no one should have to. PERIOD.

    Anyhow, that’s enough on that particular rant. Please understand that I’ve had a lot of years for all of the above to come to my attention, and I know that I’m hitting you with it cold. To the average citizen, I’m sure it seems I’m being somewhat confrontational with this, but when you have lived as I, for almost 40 years, with the very real possibility of being faced with jail for my beliefs, you tend to think the worst in any number of situations. (It’s that jury oath which will get me, if it happens. Some judges won’t take very well to my insistence that I be treated as an adult human being, and contempt can leave one behind bars for quite a while.)

    I’ll wind this up now. Good luck with your agenda, sir. You have my support now, as you did during both campaigns. No big bucks to back that up, though. Not even the $50 I sent you during the first one. Sorry, sir. Things are still a bit tight out here, but you already know that better than almost anyone.


    If anyone would like to join me in signing this, I’m more than willing to depersonalize it removing the references to my personal situation. I’d intend to CC the Chief Justice on the letter.

  4. Dan Says:

    Maybe it would be more effective to send multiple individual emails rather than one email with multiple senders? It might be more difficult to ignore that way…

    I think I’d like to send my own, anyway. What are the email addresses for the Prez and Chief Justice?

  5. Kittie Says:

    Oh my gosh – you guys are writing to the president about the oath of office and I am out here in the trenches punching back at the latest post of stupidity coming from people I know…

    Obama is a liar – he got elected and now look what he is up to….
    “religious companies are going to be forced to refer women for abortions” … no shit. It goes on and on about these poor religious companies and how they will be going against their faith and killing babies…

    I think my head exploded when I read that. Good luck with that presidential thing – I have my rats to kill here.

  6. Dan Says:

    Come now. Do you seriously think that you’re the only one among us that has to deal with religious stupidity on a very frequent basis?!

  7. Jeff Says:

    Dan, the following are the addresses that you requested:

    President Barack Obama
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC 20500

    Chief Justice John Roberts
    Supreme Court of the United States
    1 First Street, NE
    Washington, DC 20543

  8. Jeff Says:


    Look what happened on Gay Marriage when the President took a public stand. It’s worth a shot, and while it won’t stop the religious from being stupid, it will start a dialog which might get some of the religious stupidity out of public policy.

  9. Kittie Says:


    *sniffle sniffle, hiccup* yes – I imagined you all living in great metropolitan places hobnobbing with swanky intellectuals and scientists. You travel and get to eat in great restaraunts with real servers. You all have someone to drink wine or brandy with and have all probably already been to see the latest James Bond movie…

    And I am stuck here in jesusland where everyone is on some kind of “be thankful” kick or are woefully ignorant of why they even believe what they believe…

    Ok, I am done with the pity party. Thanks Dan for the smack.

  10. Dan Says:

    Honestly, what’s with the sarcasm?

  11. Kittie Says:

    That wasn’t sarcastically said – I was being deadpan serious – except the word swanky was kind of weird – you all don’t seem the “swanky” kind… not that there is anything wrong with swanky people… I just don’t know any.

    I really did kind of think I had it a bit worse and I was making fun of myself after you pointed out that I am not the only one of my kind. Without facebook to tell me every detail of your lives – I have to make up stuff to fill in the blanks…. Guess who will be losing his Chicago high-rise apartment?