Nothing could by more mistaken than the now fashionable attempt to apply the methods and concepts of the natural sciences to the solution of social problems. -Ludwig Von Mises(Planned Chaos P-30)

We all have heard numerous times Rosie O’Donnell screaming on the television about how Catholic judges must not be allowed in SCOTUS(Supreme Court Of The United States) as a measure for separation of Church and State, and I am sure you must have heard a lot and hold an opinion about a clear separation of Church and State. But this article is not about Religion and State, rather its about the undefined separation of Science and State.

What is the meaning of separation of Science and State?

A clear separation of science and state is a legal doctrine means that no government policies are made by keeping Science in mind, no government money must be spent for a specific scientific project. This separation is quite similar to separation of Church and State where government money cannot be used to promote a specific religion, no policies must be made following beliefs of a specific faith, and government and religious institutions are to be kept separate from each other.^[1]

The idea of separation of Church and State was first given by Thomas Jefferson(founding father of America, and author of American Declaration of Independence) and championed by James Madison(another founding father of America and principle drafter of United States Bill of Rights).

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” -Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Danbury Baptists^[2]

Following this phrase and the guidelines led by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison thus drafted the First Amendment as:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Unfortunately our founding fathers failed to clearly define the “wall of separation” between Science and State. Most of the laws made in United States of America or elsewhere, rely heavily on scientific basis. Massive amount of money is given to scientific funding, hard earned tax payer money is spent on “promoting science and arts”.

What is the problem with intermingling of Science and State?

Science has now become just another form of belief system – There was a time when whatever Royal Academy of Science in London proclaimed, it was considered to be a scientific truth. But with the advent of more and more scientific fronts, and decentralization of scientific research to various countries, there seems to be no clear leader in the field of scientific research, and this has resulted in creation of numerous hotly debated groups of scientists. Those who believe in Big Bang theory, those who don’t, those who believe in Global Warming, those who don’t, those who believe humans are causing global warming those who believe its a natural phenomenon.

Science is more about your faith in it than it is about the objective truth – Today scientific community is merely an agenda provider for the Atheious(as opposed to religious) people. There is a massive debate on Stem Cell research on whether government should fund it or not, the controversy is not whether government should use public money for these things or not, rather whether Stem Cell research kills human life or not. The Global Warming debate is the most famous of them all, there is no substantial evidence to show whether it is being caused by the man made pollution or its merely a natural act. Even if its known with 80% certainty that Global warming is caused by human action, the price to verify this theorem is really high. But here is the deal, if you are leftist, anti-corporationist, occidental apologist, the issue of Global warming is so much a truth to you as the Sun light. If you are a right wing conservative, then Global warming is a complete myth.

Science is merely a propaganda tool for politicians – Politicians like Al Gore use Science for their propaganda purposes, a political tool to rally the left-wing environmentalist, and to be significant again in the politics. In quasi-socialist countries like India, where the govt planners completely fail to provide utilities to people use the environmental propaganda to reduce the consumption. People in Socialist and quasi-socialist countries care more about Environment than people in Quasi-Capitalist and Capitalist countries. Socialist countries manage to completely separate church and state, but because of their failure of clear separation fo science and state, they end up mass murdering their own citizens. The best example in this regard is “Great Chinese Famine(1958-1961)” where the scientific methods of farming(the idea of planting seeds very closely as they will share the nutrition on the socialist model) , and the Great Leap Forward where the govt planners tried to scientifically induce a super fast Industrial revolution, and ended up in the death of millions of poor Chinese.

Are you saying that Science is bad, and you must not listen to Scientific advice?

No, I am not saying anything like that. I believe that there is objective truths. But I do not believe in throwing these truths, or forcing people to follow these truths against their will. I do not support the usage of science or statistics in making any public policy. For example, if scientific studies show that 80% of the black males who are once convicted, end up committing more crimes. Then I am strictly against formation of any policy which throws any black male once convicted of a crime forever in jail.

Drugs are outlawed in America because of lack of clear separation of Science and State. These people who logically harm nobody by using or selling drugs, are thrown in jail with criminals who have actually harmed other people.

Personally speaking you should sure listen to science and reason, if you feel that you are harming the environment, and must take measures to stop it, then yes, do whatever you feel like, but you do not have a right to take a gun, and enter the house of your neighbor and lock him up in your basement for 4 years because he uses more electricity then you think is the right amount for the health of the earth(which would be the case once you pass a law out which prohibits people from using too much electricity or contributing too much in “Global Warming”).
If a doctor says you will become unhealthy if you eat junk food, and if you want to listen to him, you may stop eating junk food, but you have no right to use a gun and prevent other people from buying or selling junk food.

Scientific state no different than or Theosophical state

I think at this point of the article I am losing my readers. Ok lets see it this way. Mixing Science and State is no different than mixing Church and State.
Eating pork is prohibited in Judaism and Islam, but even with a Judeo-Muslim majority pork cannot be banned in America because of clear separation of religion and state.
BUT, the same Judeo-Muslim majority can get Pork products BANNED from America if a Jewish scientist proves that eating pork is harmful for health.

Homosexuality was banned in America until 1970s for religious reasons, and LGBT celebrities like Rosie O’Donnell who go to great depths in criticizing religious Americans and their beliefs. Mainly because conservative America opposes Gay Marriage on the grounds of Culture, Tradition, and Religion. Just as much as I support Rosie O’Donnell on the issue of Gay Marriage, I totally am against on the issue of Environmentalism, where she supports the usage of Science to create oppressive laws against people.
She supports creation of environmental protection laws against Americans.

My question to her is, how is she any different than the religious fundamentalists of America who oppose Gay marriage on the grounds that it will destroy the world and throw it into sin and promiscuity? Lets say tomorrow if scientific opinion finds out that sin exists in physical form and contributes in global warming, would she support re criminalizing Homosexuality on scientific grounds?

In fact lets come on a more basic and realistic preposition. Gays and sexually promiscuous people get more AIDS than straight and sexually moral people. Should we ban homosexuality, adultery and other forms of sexual promiscuity?

Conclusion

There are many political systems who proclaim that the government’s only job is to uphold the objective truths. Sadly the problem with that is, it disastrously arms the government with tools of oppression. We may have been brainwashed into believing that Science is always more logical and reasonable than religion(Note: Merely by using the term, “brainwashed” I am not saying there is anything wrong in believing in Science, or dictating your life with Science), but we must make sure Science and State are clearly separate. Yes we may not get man on the Moon, we may not get the Internet, but if the cost of doing these things is human Liberty and Freedom, then we are running in net Loss. Voluntary human action through Free Market will eventually get us these things with most benefit to maximum number of people.
Therefore I suggest a 28th Amendment in US Constitution, the separation of Science and State.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a scientific opinion or prohibit the free exercise of private property rights on the grounds of scientific reasoning.

Science is competent to establish what is. It can never dictate what ought to be. -Ludwig Von Mises (Planned Chaos)

1. http://www.historycentral.com/Civics/S.html
2. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

It may sound weird, but then truth is always weird.
Since the eons of history, religion has kept demanding for human sacrifice in some way or other. The obsession with their self-weaved illusionist protocols and faith and believes makes them turn their face off the human instinct and makes them to catch up some cannibalistic state where they kills to sacrifice life for their pity petty believes and mystique ideas,
No, I am not talking of the Jehadis of Islamist track, nor I am talking of The Saffron Defamers like Dara Singh, the killer. I am talking of The Family From Hell, I am talking of The Grail Movement .
‘Cannibal relatives ate boy alive’
The abuse – involving members of a religious cult – was uncovered by chance last May when a neighbor’s television baby monitor picked up graphic pictures of what was happening next door.
Ondrej and his nine-year-old brother Jakub were locked and chained in the cellar for months by their mother Klara, 31 – a member of a group called the Grail Movement.

Police were called and the two boys as well as what appeared to be a 13-year-old girl were freed.
But the girl later turned out to have been one of the alleged abusers, 34-year-old Barbora Skrlova.
She subsequently fled to Norway before being brought back to the Czech Republic earlier this year.

This is just as bizarre and scary as the torment of the Fritzl kids – not over such a long time though! – And containing some really strange twists. Small time cannibalism, flaying, bondage and detecting your neighbor’s wireless network.

It’s not in that article, but Barbara (who was found with the boys and later arrested as a likely part in the abuse) pulled an unusual trick when she fled to Denmark and then to Norway. She turned to cross-dressing to disguise herself, plus taping down her breasts and shaving her head, and then pretending to be a schoolboy, posing as “Adam”, age 13. Seems her small height had helped her to appear 13 already in the cellar.
For six months she attended a school in Oslo (probably mostly learning Norwegian with other immigrants). “He’s bright for his age” the teachers thought, but didn’t break ‘Adam’s’ stunt.

Again, it all started in the depth of the cellar…
What kind of God requires you to eat children and watch the torture from your kitchen?
I remember Vivekanand in his times supported the organized evolution of religion as a social building and removal of all blind faiths and resultant mysticism to reach to a state where reason, logic and science may become the only way to realize the objective truths rather than the mystical conundrum of these religion and cults. What he failed to understand was, evolution of religion is just a misnomer of negative evolution of humanity.
Some theists may shout that it’s not the crime of religion but it is crime of cult, and the organized religions which supports (and almost enforces) monotheism and common regulations and rituals for all, always defied and opposed such cults and ritualistic symbolism. But then again, all those so called, evolved organized religions couldn’t keep these obsessive faithful believers away from their mystical sacrificial beliefs. If some religion will oppose witch-craft, it will provide situations for honor-killings, if some religion will oppose cult-clashes, it will start killing thousands over the clash of religion. How can we forget the killing and conversions of Greeks by Christianity? Even the original Greeks forgot their own religion.

There have been many Gods down through histories who have “demanded” human sacrifice, and cannibalism. Some have even “needed” the ritual torture of their victims… err, worshipers.
Sadly, the only thing new here is that it’s happening in this supposedly enlightened age of reason.
This was added by associatedcontent.com:
“Not only did the members of the Grail Movement Cult inflict torture upon the boys, but it is alleged they forced Ondrej and Jakub to mutilate themselves, giving the boys knives with which to cut themselves.”
Isn’t it terrible?
Yes it is Terrible…once again the dangers for kids are not that strange looking bloke in the bushes, but their own family…
Last year in India, at Thane, a teacher of science sacrificed his 20 year old daughter in illusionary hopes that by killing and sacrificing his daughter, he may get a son out of the mist.
I wonder from where such weird beliefs take root in? I remember about Rama and his four brothers. Some saint gave some Holy Fruit to Dashrath and his three wives (who were incapable to procreate) and demonstrated that after eating that fruit equally, the three wives of Dashrath will get pregnant. Wasn’t it all magical? But then magic do happens in stories.
But how could a science teacher ever believe that after sacrificing his living daughter, he may get a son? May be he was influenced by that story of miracle. That much influenced that he forgot all science and reason.
I wonder how safe the children are, under such traits of their teachers and parents.
The truth is, even education and science fails in removing this blindness of these faithful religionists. Most of the times, even the students remains in perplex, perplex and of what to believe, the old religious stories and faiths or their new versions of creativism, or the science? And when some incident like this happens in their vicinity, the quagmire gets more harsh and effective over the innocent kids and religion gets a further new generation to grasp under the fire of blind-faith.
I surely support Steven Pinker on the increasingly peaceful human.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ramBF…e=user&search=

I love it when scientist proves that we’ve never lived in such a peaceful world as now, and people keep being surprised. Yet Human need to evolve a lot, to get rid of these cults, organized religions and other forms of collectivism. And I am afraid the way to evolution won’t be as peaceful as it seems.

When you understand why you dismiss all other possible Gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

Police in Iran have begun a new campaign against Western-style clothing and hairstyles.
Women are being arrested if their headscarves do not fully cover their hair or their clothes show their figures too clearly.
Men are also being stopped for having hairstyles seen as inappropriate.
BBC Report >.
We used to debate over dress codes in schools, we used to oppose it, and many a times, as a sign of revolt, as a sign for our love to our freedom and choice, we used to break the dress codes during schools. Well, that was childhood. Mature teachers used to tolerate us and understand us and suggest us that after the schooldays, when we will enter the world of universities and colleges for our graduations, we will have all the freedom we want and expect. No dress codes, no compulsory attendance, no timely routinely prayer especially when none of the questions about god were being answered by any of the school teachers. The teachers used to inculcate freedom in us by invigorating the inquisitiveness and the very common curiosity with almost all children to know demand and ask for the unknown in every subject and aspect of life. We used to have biology lessons and chapters on reproduction and genetics too.
What if there is ordered a dress code for everyday living? For every outing you make you will have to wear the prescribed dress in the way it is mentioned in books, Books which no one can question and argue against.
This time teachers or voluntary monitors won’t check your dress or your shoes or haircuts or nails, police with guns and chains will check you, if found guilty of wearing any dress which is against the prescribed dress code, you will be bashed up and harassed publicly.
Can you imagine a world like that?
No, I am not talking of some Devil’s land; I am talking of Iran, the land on our very own earth.
Here we talk about democracy, liberty, Individual freedom, autonomy, while on the same earth; there is a government which even don’t want people to decide for their dresses, hairstyles and tastes of food.
It is not like I have any animosity against Islam, I am atheist and I solemnly criticize for any wrong of any religion, but Islam with its Islamic Shariat law is something which every individual should criticize and oppose. It is not only full of religious crap, but it makes a strange socialistic religious environment which clearly remains against the individual freedom and liberty.
We discuss of freedom of expression, and property rights; there are places on earth where human life is just denied to be considered as of any value taken individually.
here are some images of Iran taken by the reformist group INSA.
Can they hold the citizen like some criminals under arrest in a country, not allowed to wear their choice cloths, or read their choice books and eat their choice food?
Well, the hard-core dictatorial Islamists do try to do so.
Yet, the surge for Individual freedom lightens up in the hearts of human which invokes them to revoke. As stated by the BBC report, Despite the many attempts by this government to enforce Islamic standards, it seems to have absolutely no effect in north Tehran, our correspondent says, where some young women continue to perch their hejabs as far back on their hair as possible.

Obviously, it is impossible for any government how-so-dictatorial it may be, to hold the fire of Individual freedom under barracks of gloominess and serfdom.
Yet the barbarians try their best to harass and restrict the individual to live his own life for his own pursuit of happiness. Some Months ago, Iran police started its own fashion business BBC Article.
You cannot party in Iran, it is illegal. You cannot talk with opposite sex and roam around, it is illegal, you cannot attend a musical rock concert, it is illegal, and I guess except for breathing, everything is illegal. But then it is what Islam teaches them, that’s what the achievements of these barbarians are.
I wonder what will happen if Indian government start announcing the moral vices and forcing police to arrest people if found guilty of acting against the religious laws. Here we talk of legalizing prostitution and drugs, what if even using a slight makeup become illegal and crime?
Freedom is impossible once a government assumes a role in regulating the people’s eating, sleeping, drinking, smoking, and exercise habits.

Talks of dowry are nothing new for Indians. No matters how much the percentage of literacy has been increased, or how much standards of living have been enhanced, such cursed cultural-religious ceremonial system of marriage remains in the realm of Indian marriages. The bride’s family pays a dowry to the groom to recognize that he will provide good life and security for his wife.
If someone personally asks to me, I have no problem regarding dowry. But I have sincere problems with marriage and society. Basically, dowry is no wrong if it is NOT taken as religious-cultural tradition, but taken as a legal contract. Breach of the contract will mean legal charges being filed against the breaker of that simple contract. For that marriage contract, the two partners, who surely can be lovers, will sit up with calmness to discuss their priorities, philosophical, political, social, individual preferences and patterns and will make a mutually beneficial marriage rules applicable for both of them equally. Obviously, that written document may or may not involve any monetary transactions, that is, dowry may or may not be a part of such free-willed marriage contract. Yet, the contract will be enforceable.
The breakage of simply defined rules for the couple by any of the party may and will lead to punishment (monetary or otherwise). It is freedom of both the girl and boys to keep up their desires regarding a happy married life and make their personal laws for the mutually beneficial relation between the two. The couple may/may not agree on varied subjects like allowance for polygamy or polyandry etc. let’s say a couple agrees for monoandrous and monogamous relation, i.e. for both the bride and groom, sex outside the marriage is unbearable. That is, two people married on mutual consent for monogamy/monoandry. After age 40, male felt he don’t want sex anymore.
Then there should be freedom for wife to take divorce and go for other man, but if the husband and wife agrees to remain in contract, and allow polyandry for wife, then there is no problem. But if wife cheats, than it is cheat and immorality, that is, polyandry/polygamy itself is not immoral, but if there is a contract for monoandry/monogamy and that contract is breached not by the mutual consent of the two parties engaged, but by cheating and fraud, then it is immoral and illegal, and that will be punished as breach of contract.
But in India, the marriage system is not contract based. And that is why dowry becomes a demon. There’s no legal responsibility of the husband to take good care of wife, while he can surely exploit the girl/wife for further demands of dowry by simply acting illegal. Anywhere and in any form, where there is no economic and social freedom for the individuals, the women suffers predominantly. The women will keep suffering the illegal and immoral acts of her dowry-demanding corrupt husband while he will keep breaking the generally presumed marriages law. Woman won’t oppose because of the fear of society, how the hell will she live if she leaves her coercive and exploiter husband? Living alone is such a curse for a woman you know, and what and how will she earn and eat? Will she again be an unwanted responsibility on her father’s/ brother’s shoulders? What will happen to her children etc, so many ill-reasons for a woman to keep suffering within the four walls of her imprisoning SASURAL! Obviously, woman will have to counter attack such societal moralities which forces her to accept the wrong and discourages her to use her individual rights. It is not like government or society hasn’t done anything for the women. There are various laws against dowry and domestic violence. But such laws are irrefutably redundant and on a reasonable basis, are wrong. They are redundant because irrespective of all such laws, the violence against women and the dowry-demands never stopped. They are unreasonable, because on legal formats, such laws create a difference between rights of men and women on gender basis, providing more and unbalanced legal powers to the women. Because of societal inequalities between the two genders, the genuinely needing women seldom (nearly never) get themselves in a position to use such laws and earn justice. While on other hand, some of the pretentious and cheater women irresponsibly use such laws to harass and exploit the male counterparts.
The ideal state would be equal and reasonable irrevocable rights and total freedom for citizens irrespective of their gender, class, creed, religion etc and non-interference of government, society, authority in individual freedom. < discussed here Liberty, Tolerance, Freedom of expression and Political Correctness!
In Ayn Rand’s words, “Evil requires the sanction of Victim!” it is the woman who can stop all the atrocities against womanhood. It is her individual strength and the inalienable rational rights which she acquires by virtue of her own rational faculty and not by the provision of any government or society which can and ultimately will prompt her to stand against any ill-defined tradition or cultural-religious based ill-practices.
A woman’s freedom is not dependent on the irrational reservation or governmental announced laws based on flawed basis. The freedom and enlightenment of womanhood is dependent only on the individual woman standing on her own against any ill any injustice of religion, society, community or state government. It is the woman alone, who can safeguard and void the evil victimizing her, and none else. And for that, obviously women will have to demand for her individual rights, she will have to stand alone. She will have to be the light!

Let us consider a just opposite situation. Let’s say it is not bride or her family who have to pay dowry, but it is the groom who has to pay dowry in order to get married to prove to the bride’s family that he will be a good provider. Will that change the situations of womanhood to any better state?
Obviously, the answer is a big NO. It won’t effect in the situation of women in the society. The example is the Thailand’s cultural/traditional system of “Sin Sod”, according to which, the male has to give dowry to prove that he can be a good provider for the bride. But, in absence of social and economical freedom, even that causes a curse to women. (Read more about Sin Sod here Thai Dowries Change with Time.
Obviously, I am not against this system too if individual rights and mutually consensual premises are enforced under free-will contract system.
Many westerners marries farm girls from NE of Thailand by paying good amount in Sin Sod, some of them even marries girls who have already worked in bars or prostitution rackets for the cause of poverty.
Mostly, girls are being sold there by their families irrespective of their consent or non-consent just for the cause of greed of money by the poor farmers. The girls may be minors too. Hence, it causes unwanted breakage of individual rights and exploitation of individuals who obviously are women, girls. Many Thai men just cannot marry because of lack of good amount for Sin Sod, again similar situations as in India. There also, the dowry system proves to be working ok at rich family cordons. But at middle class and poor class, same dowry system proves to be havoc. It simply shows that, until the woman herself won’t stand for her individual rights as an individual and not as a mere part of a family or community or sect or religion/tradition or country, she won’t get any justice, no matters what ever changes the cultural traditions may take place. There is only one way for freedom, and that way is the Individual’s will and strength to be free on the basis of reason!

http://couplewriters.blogspot.com/p/about-us.html

Liberty Enlightening the World
The government of the Indian state of Maharashtra says it plans to build a statue off the Mumbai (Bombay) coast to rival New York’s Statue of Liberty.
BBC News
It is true that Shivaji was a great Human, a pride warrior!
But how justified is this squandering project? The preliminary costs suggested are around $4.5 millions, which are around Rs 220 millions. How much time it will take to get back the invested money and than earn profits?
We should not forget that this money is not being produced by the government, it’s all the money collected by taxes.
Furthermore, the planned statue is being compared with the Statue of Liberty.
Statue of Liberty is not a sign of some fighter or war, it signifies friendship, and it signifies liberty! Its appearance relates to the ancient roman goddess Libertas signifying freedom from totalitarianism, oppression and slavery!
The statue of liberty was not a US government’s project. It was given to US by some businessmen and people of France as a free-will. That statue simply signifies a will of freedom from any sort of tyranny whole round the world. The seven spikes on its crown represent the Seven Great Continents and the seven seas. The torch in her hands represents the enlightenment from the darkness of collectivism, slavery, ignorance, oppression and exploitation. The uplifting foot signifies the movement of liberty spreading whole round the world for every citizen of world anywhere. It is a call for liberty, democracy, political equality and capitalism!

On the other hand, Shivaji has always been posted as the pride of Marathas by Shiv Sena, which not only raised issues of discrimination on behalf of religion, but also raised issues of regionalism and reservations on behalf of statehood and keeps reiterating that “more should be done to promote the rights of “local” people in the state rather than “outsiders”!. Obviously, the statue of Shivaji will represent Marathi pride. Just some days ago Maharashtra was burning in fire on the issue of statehoods, UP, BIHARI, Tamils, and Marathi etc. The Hindu Muslim rift demonstrated by Shiv Sena is already a problem for peace, freedom and enlightenment. Where the need is to remove the darkness of dogmatic religions and superstitions and discriminations on behalf of language, native place and religion/cult/creed, the idol of Shivaji is constantly (and wrongly) being represented to strengthen it.
The plan is to erect the statue of Shivaji of about same height as that of statue of Liberty (305 ft=92.68 m). I wonder how the government is going to symbolize it to represent liberty, political equality, Individual rights, capitalism, globalization and democracy!
On the economic level, the plan may prove to be good to increase further more tourism in Mumbai. But the question is will it be a profitable move? $4.5 million is not a small amount, than it will cost for maintenance, security and arrangements too. So, is there any planned idea of government that how the statue will be adding for the public money and prosperity?
Actually, government never worries to think for the prosperity and profits of those who gives money to it as under compulsory taxation.
One suicide every 8 hours
At a time, when the water and road services of Mumbai are at worst, when farmers of Vidharbha are dying of hunger and committing suicide under the pressures of loans, government has planned to waste such a huge amount of money which has been forcibly collected from the citizens of Maharashtra, it is not voluntary-taxation or free-charity to erect the statue of liberty. So, when the money being planned to be invested on the statue is not donated at free-will and is actually being coerced and extracted from the individuals by the government, than how can it represent freedom and liberty? Literacy rates of Maharashtra are still just 76% so, how the statue will represent the enlightenment?
Obviously, it is nothing but a political ploy of congress government of Maharashtra (which failed to face the major problems at every facet) to woo the Marathi votes by encouraging the regional feelings. It is again a plan based on gaining short term profits totally concerned with Congress and which surely will cause greater loss for the Individual citizens in general. The money collected by Individuals under coercive compulsory taxation is again being used for political profits of a fraud political party and politicians. So, isn’t the project showing the tyranny, oppression of Individuals by collectivist government? And the blind public will again get involved in the dark feelings of cultism, regionalism, linguistic priorities and emotivism and will hurt themselves furthermore against enlightenment.
I term it as a slap on the face of Democracy, Capitalism, Freedom, Enlightenment and Individual Liberty!

GOD RESPONDS TO PARIS HILTON’S CLAIMS SHE FOUND HIM
Mount Sinai (AFP) Speaking in what is only His second interview in more than two millenia, God has said He wants to be categorically ‘on the record’ that Paris Hilton definitely hasn’t found him. His comments were made to Moses XLIII, the forty-third generation descendent of Moses who recorded God’s first interview.

“There’s no way Paris Hilton could have found me,” Moses quoted God as saying on his ABC television program ‘Stone Tablet News’ on Monday. “I am Almighty and I don’t just move in mysterious ways, I’m darn good at playing hide-and-seek!”

Moses said God, who sounded in fine spirits despite dwindling numbers of believers, thinks Hilton had Him confused with His only begotten son, Jesus.

 

“When Jesus was young, He was a very crafty hide-and-seek player,” God said. “Anybody who has read My book will recall the time he managed to hide from Mary and Joseph for three days and nights in a temple of all places!”

When questioned by Moses as to Jesus’ whereabouts from the age of twelve to thirty-three, God replied, “Not telling! But I will say it was rather foolish of him to have come out of hiding. We all know what that folly led to!”

God then claimed that Hilton may even have Him confused with the Virgin Mary.

“Think of it this way,” God said unto Moses. “Paris Hilton probably has never even seen a grilled cheese sandwich in her life. Prison food like that can make people see all sorts of strange things but when was the last time anybody ever saw Me burned into a grilled cheese sandwich?”

Independent sources confirm that manifestations of God have never taken any anthropormorphic form and that it’s only ever been the Virgin Mary and her Son Jesus, who have ever been seen in this form.

When asked by Moses why Paris Hilton should claim to have found Him, God replied, “Bless her, her heart’s probably in the right place but she isn’t one of My brightest creatures. Obviously, the publicity is good for Me too and goes to show that repentent sinners invariably turn to My religion when they get sent to jail and not one of those kooky new-age ones they all flock to on the outside world.”

God then scoffed at suggestions that Paris Hilton intended to give up her lifestyle of endless VIP parties, red carpets and pursuing the limelight upon her release.

“She’s obviously forgotten My omnipresence if she thinks she can tell such porkies and not get smited. Besides, the whole Rupert Murdoch empire would crumble if it wasn’t for the bubble-headed antics of celebutantes like Hilton.”

When Moses asked if this would be such a bad thing, God replied, “Of course! Rupert is the embodiment of evil on earth and without evil, there can be no free will and without free will, there can be no salvation. The whole darn Christian industry would collapse if something like that ever happened!”

 

In summarizing, Moses asked whether God believed Hilton found Jesus or the Virgin Mary to which He replied, “My money is on Mary. Hilton is, afterall, not exactly on death row. If she was, she’d have a better chance of finding Jesus but she still wouldn’t find Me — especially after just three days looking!”

Meanwhile, God took time to speak with Pope Benedict XVI after his interview with Moses.

Pope Benedict asked, “Holy Father, who do you think will win the soccer World Cup this year?”

God merely smiled and tsk-tsked the pontiff and, amid a fury of thunder and lightning, ascended back up to Heaven.

(I enjoy writing humorous pieces as much as any other kind of fiction. A style I particularly like is the fake news item, such as this.)