Posted by thepete on Sunday, October 16th at 11:48 AM. [link]

friendlyatheist:

GODzilla. What a great name for a fictional character.
-FA

SIGH.
WHY would the Japanese be angry at a fictional character?  In other news: the correct pronunciation of the giant monster’s name is “go-ji-ra”.  So, “God” has nothing to do with it.

friendlyatheist:

GODzilla. What a great name for a fictional character.

-FA

SIGH.

WHY would the Japanese be angry at a fictional character?  In other news: the correct pronunciation of the giant monster’s name is “go-ji-ra”.  So, “God” has nothing to do with it.


Posted by thepete on Sunday, October 9th at 7:51 PM. [link]

It’s hard to do it because you gotta look people in the eye and tell ‘em they’re irresponsible and lazy. And who’s gonna wanna do that? Because that’s what poverty is, ladies and gentlemen. In this country, you can succeed if you get educated and work hard. Period. Period.

Bill “Poverty is a lack of hard work” O’Reilly, for Fox News

(via reallyfoxnews)

When are people going to realize how ignorant this statement is? Social mobility is becoming more and more limited each day, and poverty has nothing to do with hard work. It is blatantly obvious that,

1. Bill O’Reilly has never had a service job in his life

2. inherited wealth, and 

3. has never studied sociological theory or any sociology related topic in his life, or else he might actually understand the concepts of social mobility and oppression/greed.

(via killtvmakestuff)

I wonder how many of his fans he just called “irresponsible and lazy” in this?

(via feministslut)

A guy who gets paid millions for working an hour a day gets to call full-time minimum-wage workers irresponsible and lazy?

[animated image: Judge Judy sits in her courtroom in front of an American flag and New York state flag. She glances to towards the right side of the image and gives an incredulous smirk.]

(via afunnyfeminist)

The 99% posters I see MOSTLY complain about this lie.  This piece of shit we all get fed that “getting educated” will put us on the path to success.  Now we all took out student loans to pay hyper-inflated tuition prices for bullshit degrees that don’t matter when there are NO JOBS you can put that degree to work with.

of course he’s insulting his fans and dissenters alike, but the difference is his fans will agree with him.  They’re the 53%-ers, the ones who think it’s okay to work 100 hours a week to make ends meet.  Because they believe this bullshit myth of “hard work.” 

Newsflash: The people telling us we just have to “work hard” have no fucking idea what that really even means.  It’s just like being told you didn’t pray hard enough for something to come.  If you’re provided for, you’re working hard enough, whether that means broadcasting one hour a day on television or working 100 hours a week with no benefits.  If you’re not provided for, then you’re not working hard enough.  Even if you’re working 110 hours a week.  

Just like God can’t lose, Capitalism can’t lose either.  Corporations can’t lose.  It’s not their fault when the economy collapses, it’s not their fault when they don’t create any jobs for people to “work hard” at.  It IS their doing when things are going well, though.

(via sonic-hip-attack)

Fuck this fucktard. Poverty is not a lack of hard work. It’s a lack of luck. Fuck you rich people and fuck you Bill O’Reilly.

(via simplyopinions)

It’s opinions and attitudes like O’Reilly’s that will raise the collective temperature of the lower class to a boiling point.  History shows us that poor people, if pushed, will turn to violence to quench their thirst for “justice” or “fairness” when, really it will be about jealousy and revenge.  But what you call it won’t matter.  Back during the late 1800s and early 1900s, rich people’s homes were sacked in cities like New York.  Rich people hired guards to make sure no one would burn their homes down.  See—they weren’t common thieves—they wanted revenge and it’ll happen again, just like back then (read Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” for more on this—it’s a brilliant history book as it is told from the loser’s point-of-view).

But the thing is, the attitude of the rich isn’t entirely inaccurate—if you work hard you are more likely to do well.  After all, success is when preparation meets opportunity.  So the rich are right in this way.  Of course, they don’t talk about the lack of opportunities. Also, just because the rich are partially right doesn’t give them license to be douchebags about it.  And the bigger the douchebag they are, the more anxious the “unprivileged” will be to pop that bag and shower in that vinegar and water goodness (sorry, metaphor went off the rails there).

Now, when the rich get all uppity about “class warfare” they’re just Orwellian-style doublespeaking.  In other words, when rich people talk of “class warfare” they’re doing it to distract us from noticing that they, themselves are committing acts of class war.

When a rich person says to a jobless, homeless or penniless person (JHP), “work hard and you will succeed!” that is class warfare.  The rich person is withholding all aid and resources from this “JHP” person.  Now consider what you do to your enemy in a time of war: you cut off their resources.

Therefore cutting funding to social programs, health programs, libraries and education is literally class warfare.  It’s wonderful since they get mad when they’re accused of class warfare, but they don’t have a problem accusing everyone else.

And capitalism is JUST like God, as one of the rebloggers above said.  And it’s just as impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who has an irrational belief in something.  

The system is failing us—and it will continue to fail us because of this absurd faith in the magical properties of capitalism.  So, until something dramatically changes, the system will continue to fall apart because the people in charge are just ignoring the problems, even denying they exist—as though belief is enough.  They’re like economic Christian Scientists.

Idiots.

(Source: brainyquote.com)


Posted by thepete on Sunday, October 9th at 4:27 PM. [link]

When’s the last time you were offended?

thereisnogod:

“You have adults going, “I was offended! I was offended!” Well, so what? Be offended! Nothing happens! You’re an adult, grow up, deal with it. “But I was offended!” I don’t care! Nothing happens when you’re offended. It’s not like, “I went to a comedy show, and the comedian said something about the Lord, and I was offended, and when I woke up in the morning, I had leprosy!” Nothing happens. “I want to live in a democracy, but I never want to be offended again!” Well, you’re an idiot.”

Steve Hughes (via cocknbull)

I get around this by understanding people are allowed their own views and so long as said views don’t effect me, I don’t care.  So if I see a show or a comic that offends me, I walk out.  That’s it.  If they’re preaching hate or violence, I might send them a nasty email or post something nasty about them on my blog.  But that’s it.  I’ve got better things to do than waste time being offended.

Which reminds me, I’ve got better things to do that belaboring this point. :)


Posted by thepete on Saturday, October 8th at 3:37 PM. [link]

I agree with the sentiment of this “Words that Christians Misuse” but I think this graphic utterly full of crap.
“Study” saying what they really do at “Bible Study” is really “Bible Worship” is semantics. Most people who study something usually revere that thing or else they wouldn’t be studying it.  You might as well call Neil deGrasse Tyson a “Science Worshipper” (and you’d be accurate).
“Truth” this is NOT the “conformity with fact or reality.”  I’m not sure where this definition even comes from.  Merriam-Webster defines truth as the following (important part emboldened/italicized by me):
a archaic : fidelity, constancyb : sincerity in action, character, and utterance 2a (1) : the state of being the case : fact (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3) often capitalized: a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics >c : the body of true statements and propositions3a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : true 2c : fidelity to an original or to a standard 4capitalized Christian Science : god— in truth: in accordance with fact : actually
So, in other words, one of the official definitions of the truth fits pretty much with the way Christians use it.  Sad that language, itself, seems to be biased toward religion.  But again, Christians aren’t really misusing the word “truth.”
“Morality” is NOT what causes the least amount of harm to others.  That’s the most absurd definition of “morality” I’ve ever read.  Morality is doing what is right (though it’s definition is more involved than just that). Sometimes we define “right” as doing more harm for the greater good.  Like going to war, or killing in self-defense, or euthanasia.  Morality is a big fat gray zone of debate since so often the very definition of what is “right” changes based on one’s mood.  So, if you believe what God says is right and someone tells you God said that it’s OK to slaughter the Canaanites, then wiping out all of the people of Canaan is a moral thing to do.
“Freewill” is not a word.  Well, not a noun, anyway.  It’s an adjective. It means “voluntary” or, oddly, “spontaneous”.  What Christians say God gave us is “Free Will”.  In other words, the ability to be free with our will. Of all the problems I have with religion, I think this is the part I have the least trouble with.  But the above graphic says “In the Bible God only gave us the ability to choose what we want to do (will), but not the freedom to act upon those choices.” This makes no sense. The Bible says we are free to exercise our will. Which part of “free will” stops you from “acting upon those choices”?  The reality, for both Believers and non-believers, is that there are consequences to your actions.  Christianity dreams up all sorts of scary shit to keep Believers in line, but there’s nothing in Christianity that forces Believers to be a certain way—they just scare you into it.  That’s still free will since it is your choice to do something that will result in punishment.
“Adultery” does not mean “having sex with a person who is married to another.”  I’ll paraphrase the correct definition and say that adultery is having sex with someone other than one’s spouse.  As for the part where Jesus says adultery and lust are the same thing, I think, from a certain point of view, that’s an accurate statement.  The idea is to keep all of your love for your spouse and when you feel amorous toward someone who isn’t your spouse without acting on those feelings, in a way, you’re cheating.  Of course, you’re also giving into your genetics, which aren’t really programmed for monogamy, so whatever.
“Love” is the second of two words that is properly defined by this graphic.  Though it is incomplete.  The complete definition is “strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties.”  It is standard Christian propaganda to say that God has a personal relationship with all of us and that “He” “loves” us.  This is obviously not true since there is no God.  However, this is not an example of Christians misusing words.  They say that “God is love” because they are good at marketing.
Wow, I’m really starting to wonder about my fellow atheists.  When you make up a whole graphic that claims to describe how Christians misuse certain words, you might want to consult a dictionary, first.
Seriously, this stupid graphic is one of the most moronic things I’ve read in weeks—and I’ve been reading a lot about Rick Perry, so that’s saying something!

I agree with the sentiment of this “Words that Christians Misuse” but I think this graphic utterly full of crap.

“Study” saying what they really do at “Bible Study” is really “Bible Worship” is semantics. Most people who study something usually revere that thing or else they wouldn’t be studying it.  You might as well call Neil deGrasse Tyson a “Science Worshipper” (and you’d be accurate).

“Truth” this is NOT the “conformity with fact or reality.”  I’m not sure where this definition even comes from.  Merriam-Webster defines truth as the following (important part emboldened/italicized by me):

a archaic : fidelityconstancyb : sincerity in action, character, and utterance 2(1) : the state of being the case : fact (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality (3) often capitalizeda transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics >c : the body of true statements and propositions3a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : true 2c : fidelity to an original or to a standard 4capitalized Christian Science : god— in truth: in accordance with fact : actually

So, in other words, one of the official definitions of the truth fits pretty much with the way Christians use it.  Sad that language, itself, seems to be biased toward religion.  But again, Christians aren’t really misusing the word “truth.”

“Morality” is NOT what causes the least amount of harm to others.  That’s the most absurd definition of “morality” I’ve ever read.  Morality is doing what is right (though it’s definition is more involved than just that). Sometimes we define “right” as doing more harm for the greater good.  Like going to war, or killing in self-defense, or euthanasia.  Morality is a big fat gray zone of debate since so often the very definition of what is “right” changes based on one’s mood.  So, if you believe what God says is right and someone tells you God said that it’s OK to slaughter the Canaanites, then wiping out all of the people of Canaan is a moral thing to do.

“Freewill” is not a word.  Well, not a noun, anyway.  It’s an adjective. It means “voluntary” or, oddly, “spontaneous”.  What Christians say God gave us is “Free Will”.  In other words, the ability to be free with our will. Of all the problems I have with religion, I think this is the part I have the least trouble with.  But the above graphic says “In the Bible God only gave us the ability to choose what we want to do (will), but not the freedom to act upon those choices.” This makes no sense. The Bible says we are free to exercise our will. Which part of “free will” stops you from “acting upon those choices”?  The reality, for both Believers and non-believers, is that there are consequences to your actions.  Christianity dreams up all sorts of scary shit to keep Believers in line, but there’s nothing in Christianity that forces Believers to be a certain way—they just scare you into it.  That’s still free will since it is your choice to do something that will result in punishment.

“Adultery” does not mean “having sex with a person who is married to another.”  I’ll paraphrase the correct definition and say that adultery is having sex with someone other than one’s spouse.  As for the part where Jesus says adultery and lust are the same thing, I think, from a certain point of view, that’s an accurate statement.  The idea is to keep all of your love for your spouse and when you feel amorous toward someone who isn’t your spouse without acting on those feelings, in a way, you’re cheating.  Of course, you’re also giving into your genetics, which aren’t really programmed for monogamy, so whatever.

“Love” is the second of two words that is properly defined by this graphic.  Though it is incomplete.  The complete definition is “strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties.”  It is standard Christian propaganda to say that God has a personal relationship with all of us and that “He” “loves” us.  This is obviously not true since there is no God.  However, this is not an example of Christians misusing words.  They say that “God is love” because they are good at marketing.

Wow, I’m really starting to wonder about my fellow atheists.  When you make up a whole graphic that claims to describe how Christians misuse certain words, you might want to consult a dictionary, first.

Seriously, this stupid graphic is one of the most moronic things I’ve read in weeks—and I’ve been reading a lot about Rick Perry, so that’s saying something!


Posted by thepete on Tuesday, September 27th at 6:15 PM. [link]

thereisnogod:

christiannightmares:

Christian heckler calls Obama the Antichrist (For a related post, click here http://christiannightmares.tumblr.com/post/995097248/tea-party-sign-the-antichrist-is-living-in-the)

Fuck your god.

While I didn’t hear in there the specific accusation that Obama is the anti-Christ, I’d like to just come out and say it:

I’m anti-Christ.

…But I’m not THE anti-Christ.  I feel that while some of his alleged teachings sound great, I think you’d be better off reading the words of Superman or Spider-Man to look for wisdom.  They’re just as reality-based as Jesus, in fact, I think modern super-heroes are more relavant than some ancient super-hero who fictionally lived 2000 years ago. 

It’s sort of like when people tell me I’m going to go to hell or that I won’t get into heaven both because I’m an atheist.  I usually respond “Ok, I guess.”

“But aren’t you afraid?”

“Um, of something that doesn’t appear to exist? No.”


Posted by thepete on Thursday, November 4th at 12:12 AM. [link]

How I see the universe and how I (don’t) see God (at all).

A week or two ago, I stumbled across a post somewhere on some blog that featured a TED video of a pastor/minister/priest/somethingorother giving a talk about how God can let terrible tragedy happen. 

I won’t go into my honest surprise at seeing God being the topic of a TED video.  I wasn’t about to watch the thing, but I did glance over a bit of what the guy who posted the video had to say.  As with all believers, I’m puzzled as to why people have this seemingly impossible-to-deny desire to believe in a supreme being.  The video was apparently about how silly it is that most believers agree that God is infinite and yet they’ve also decided that God is “this” or “that.”  Yes, it is silly.  But what about the part where you accept that God is infinite right along the idea that God can ever be comprehended or understood in the first place?  Why even bother trying to comprehend him if you know the human brain can never fully do it?  And since He is just so far above you, why do you even bother believing at all?  What’s the point?

I left some of that in a comment on the already commented upon post (most of the comments were from believers).  And I did get a response from the original poster explaining that we should try to understand God so we can understand existence, understand how we understand and understand how we relate to each other.

Being careful to only slightly stretch my own 3 Rules of Internet Arguing, I decided to leave one more comment.  Here it is:

I guess I just don’t see much to *understand*. I mean, I read the science, I understand how certain conditions lined up and allowed me to exist.  Understanding existence in this way tells me that life is incredibly fragile.  Seeing how lifeless the universe appears to be, suggests how incredibly special and unique we are.  It also tells me that it is we who bring meaning to the universe—that without us, existence would just be a bunch of planets, asteroids, stars and space dust.  Without us, no one would be able to attribute meaning to any of it.  So, that makes human life invaluable.

So, to me, when someone I know dies or gets cancer or stubs his toe, I understand this as the way the universe works.  I don’t really see a need to describe it in terms of God.  I don’t see evidence of God.  I actually see evidence of a lack of God.

But I’ll shut up now.  I know how useful it is for you believers to hear from a non-believer (not at all).

To me, there can’t really be meaning without anyone around the comprehend that meaning.  If meaning was so important to God, you’d think that He’d create a universe teaming with life forms—plenty of people to understand the meaning He has created.

Instead, we are the only ones.  We are the only ones who see the patterns.  We see star systems and galaxies and shapes and beauty.  We bring the meaning.  Not God.

We see the stunning mechanics of the universe, while the universe itself, sees nothing.

And that’s OK with me.


Posted by thepete on Tuesday, October 26th at 3:51 PM. [link]

“It’s all about the truth, people.” Haha, easy for you to say…

From friendlyatheist:

“It’s all about the truth, people. And all the evidence is crystal clear right now: the earth is far older than 6,000 years. Evolution is a real, and it is a process built on raw chance driven by the brutal engines of selection, and there is no sign of a loving, personal god, but only billions of years of pitiless winnowing without any direction other than short-term survival and reproduction. It’s not pretty, it’s not consoling, it doesn’t sanctify virginity, or tell you that god really loves your foreskin, but it’s got one soaring virtue that trumps all the others: it’s true.”

Confrontation all the way : Pharyngula

Brilliant. Read this, all of it, now.

(via bildungsroman)

YES! GO READ IT NOW! I COMMAND IT!

Dude, why are we still having this conversation? We’ve ALL been saying this shit for years! I’m sick of people telling me to go read stuff I already know.  It’s just replacing one dogma with another.  QUICK! GO READ THIS, IT SHALL REINFORCE EVERYTHING YOU BELIEVE!

Gee, thanks, but I’m already pretty firm in my point-of-view. I don’t need to read someone state the obvious

And for God’s sake (!) stop using the word “selection” when referring to evolution.  That suggests there’s a thought process behind things that happen.  It’s not “the brutal engines of selection” it’s the brutal engines of FATE. There’s no being or even “unit” that “makes” a choice: “You get to live, YOU do not.”

It’s just random luck meeting random preparedness—fate.

It’s like when people call evolution a “process”.  It isn’t.  It may look like one because we line the evidence up in a nice easy-to-understand fashion. But the reality is that it’s not a process.  It’s a mess of random events that cause things randomly.  It’s not even “survival of the fittest,” it’s more “survival of the lucky.”

When we use words like “process” and “selection” we just give the believers room to wiggle and redefine what “truth” even means.  That, in turn, allows them to keep preaching.  And THAT, in turn, makes me want to walk away from the discussion, sit down and wait for the believers to die.

This is why I asked: why are we still having this discussion?


Posted by thepete on Thursday, September 9th at 6:29 PM. [link]

THAT’S how bedbugs procreate? So, uh, what’s up with that, God?

Don’t let the bedbugs bite? That’s not the only thing we want to stop them from doing!

So, I saw this post and thought it provided a nice example of an argument I’ve been making for years:

“Another Resons To Avoid Bedbugs: Traumatic Insemination” from underpaidgenius:

Scientists discover new weapon in fight against bedbugs

Bedbugs are swiftly becoming the bane of humanity, plaguing homes, offices, movie theaters and malls alike. But the fight against the red and brown bloodsuckers has gained a new weapon. E! ScienceNews reports that researchers in Sweden have discovered immature bedbugs release a pheromone to dissuade adult males from mating with them. Scientists say the findings can be applied towards a solution to the bedbug dilemma.

When bedbugs mate, they do so by “traumatic insemination.” As the female lacks a genital opening, the male pierces her abdomen with his hypodermic genitalia to leave his sperm in her abdominal cavity. And because male bedbugs don’t discriminate between partners, they will climb on top of the nearest comrade — be it male or sexually immature. In these situations, they fatally wound the unsuspecting recipient of their amorous advances.

Luckily for bedbugs, nature has developed an alarm system to defend against unwanted embraces. When a male bedbug approaches a sexually immature nymph or male bedbug, the insect releases pheromones to let the male know he should find another friend.

Man, animals like this shouldn’t exist in the first place.

That last comment there is from Stowe Boyd, the “Underpaid Genius” behind UnderpaidGenius.com.  I agree with him—but hey, God works in mysterious ways, right?  The thing is, this isn’t just mysterious—this is downright fucked up.

I remember the exact moment I became an atheist. I was about 12 and was in Sunday School.  My teacher was telling us how God was “all around us.”  I thought about that for a moment and then pointed to the middle of the table I was sitting at and asked “God is there? In the middle of this table?”

“Yes, of course!” replied the teacher.

“But that’s stupid,” I said.

But God being in the middle of a table is just the tip of the “stupid” iceberg.  Look at how bedbugs reproduce for Christ’s sake ;)  Their males have sword penises that wound their mates with sperm.  And check it out homophobes!  There are GAY BEDBUGS, TOO!

So much for homosexuality being “unnatural,” but I digress…

The point is, there are too many seriously twisted things in nature that are just too illogical and, frankly, messed up, to think a “just” god would allow them to occur. 

So, rather than give the female bedbug a nice, identifiable orifice for sex, it gives the male a stabbing tool for a penis. 

WHAT A DICK—and I’m not talking about a male bedbug’s reproductive organs.  Why is God a dick? “Because He works in mysterious ways.”

Orrrrr, God doesn’t exist and the “process” of evolution, the hit-and-miss style of life’s random attempts to work, yields some pretty bizarre results.

What’s both scary and heartening is that the “evolution” argument seems much more rational and suggests the universe is much more stable than the “God” argument.

According to believers, if I piss off God I could end up with cancer or dead. 

I’ll try my chances with random fate, thanks.

Just keep those fucking bedbugs away from me, though—those things are MESSED UP.


Posted by thepete on Thursday, September 2nd at 8:59 PM. [link]

Who needs God? Not the Universe, says one of the smartest people on Earth (Stephen Hawking)

friendlyatheist:

Hawkings on the origin of the universe - MSNBC.com

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” Hawking and his co-author, Caltech physicist Leonard Mlodinow, write in “The Grand Design,” which is due to be issued next week. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

Wow!  The universe and I have a lot in common!  Neither of us need God!  It’s like we think alike, the universe and me!!  I bet we’d get along really well!  I wish the universe would come by my apartment once in a while.  We’d have a blast!!

Er, a bang!

Wait, I don’t want to have sex with the universe!


Posted by thepete on Tuesday, August 3rd at 12:14 AM. [link]

Hey, All You Believers, Maybe This is God Sending Us a Message?

Found via underpaidgenius:

paulmalouf:

Andrew Nikiforuk @ The Tyee ~ The Enbridge Dirty Dozen: Michigan disaster follows 12 other big spills or penalties this decade for giant aiming to pipe tar sands oil to Kitimat

Enbridge Inc, based in Calgary, Alberta, employs 6,000 workers and ranks 18th as one of Canada’s largest companies in revenue. It operates the world’s longest crude oil pipelines, through which it transports 12 per cent U.S. oil imports.

Between 1999 and 2008 Enbridge recorded 610 spills that released 132,000 barrels of hydrocarbons into farms, wetlands and waterways on the continent. According to the Polaris Institute, this volume of crude “amounts to approximately half of the oil that spilled from the oil tanker the Exxon Valdez after it struck a rock in Prince William Sound, Alaska in 1988.” (…)

As an atheist, I hate to even play along that there might be a god, but since so very much is at stake, I’ll do it this once:

< believe >

HEY, LOOK AT ALL OF THESE OIL MISHAPS! CLEARLY, IT’S THE ALMIGHTY GOD TELLING US TO GET OFF THE OIL!

All the evidence is there. All you need to do is Accept His Will and get off the oil.  What’s your problem?  YOU’LL GO TO HELL IF YOU DON’T SUPPORT ALTERNATIVE ENERGY AND FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING!!

JUST LOOK AT THE SIGNS, IGNORE THEM AND YOU ARE A DENIER OF GOD’S WILL!! 

Look, in a moment of weakness, I, an atheist, prayed to God and asked Him: “God, do you want us to get off oil or not?”

THEN ALL OF THESE SPILLS HAPPENED.


CLEARLY, IT IS GOD’S WILL THAT WE GET OFF OIL. DO NO BLASHPHEME ANY LONGER.

OIL=SATAN THAT IS ALL.

< /Believe >

This had better work—I even learned of enough of their language to converse with them and everything!


Leave a message at
740 297 6661
and get on the 666cast
About:

The idea is that all of human society is based on a power structure that enslaves the trusting/ignorant and rewards the greedy and the dishonest. From government, to business to our individual lives, all of our actions are tailored to further support a system that exploits all of us and wastes our lives in the process. Website666.com endeavors to explain how. Shape-shifting lizards aren't running the world, but they might as well be. Only a sociopath would think they deserve to run things.

-ThePete,
webmaster website666.com,
effyou.org, dntlk.com, and thepete.com