According to this article, there's a social force that compels an individual to moral tepidity. Extreme behavior (for good or bad) requires a corresponding dip into scalding or chilly waters to regulate ones moral temperature. Is this a real effect or a result of transposed physics into a subjectively perceived situation? Like determination of implied opposites to chart a course through a maze of acceptable action. An implied opposite is a semantic truism like "SMALL" vs. "big". The basic problem is not having an endgame plan. What happens when Pastor Ted turned out to be gay, or Iraqis turn on their American saviors? Perhaps the worm turns when physics proves hubris to be poor planning. The Japanese don't have a problem w/ that (except their cars are too damn hard to work on).

So I'm Lao-Tse, the inconsistent blogger, "everything has a purpose but me" (approximate quote). I started this blog to declare my opposition to pervasive religious bullshit. Now I'm afraid someone is reading it like I'm supposed to be entertaining & coherent. Get a life. I refuse to be influenced by hit stats (lie). I won't be owned (even though I get lonely). I refuse to write even more contemptuous drivel out of cowering fear of unknown judgments, nor will I correct misconceptions presented in previous posts (except minor ones). Eat Me. I'm lazy alright? (I mean I hope that's all OK w/ everybody ... ?)

--------

percent map of non-religion Going by this map, less industrialized countries show more believers. Since governments develop technology mostly from war industries, but benefit patriotically from blind faith believers, it appears to be a conflict of self interest: The more war they promote, the fewer believers. (yes, except for N Europe & Canada) (both socialist).

Indoctrination fails: 2 out of 3 kids leave the church (World Net Daily)
Same sex behavior seen in nearly all animals (sciencedaily.com)
God's a dick (Sinfest.com)
Rational thoughts from a religious skeptic. — Mark Twain