It just seems to me that humans are unsuitable for life on this planet. I mean, look at people. Either they are all foolish morons yelling and screaming about things they know nothing about, or they are stupidly sitting around wishing that the world would conform to their expectations.

People are, quite simply, dumb.

So we have people running around trying to force, by arms and by dogmatic assertion, others to believe in invisible gods, magic, and "higher powers". Dumb! Still others state that they support "reason", yet uphold religious morals and ideals as valid. Dumb!

Is there any intelligent life on this planet at all?

People cannot stand defiance. When someone is in a position of considered authority, and issues a decree, those who actively defy such decree are considered to be trouble-makers and problems.

Thus it is that those who are defiant inevitably are considered to be moral deviants. To defy from a subscribed standard is to deviate from the established norms.

This is particularly true in the modern era when speaking of sexuality. Sexual minorities are often referred to as deviants. Yet, in light of an overtly-oppressive dominating theology and legislative demands, oft times those who become part of a sexual minority are simply acting defiantly against domination and control. In effect, they are rebelling.

When entering a foreign land, learning the native language is the easiest and most assurable method of gaining needed or desired information and services. In fact, it is more or less necessary.

Even among people who speak a common language, misunderstandings often arise. Different segments and subcultures of any given civilisation give birth to many different methods of expression. If a person who has been raised in economic disparity in a major city meets someone who was raised in an upper-class small-town area, it is very likely that the two would find a great deal of difficulty understanding each other.

With the big exception of the AMC theatre chain, which allows customers to bring in their own drinks so long as they are not in cans or bottles, most theatres force you to shop at the concession stand after you purchase a ticket there if you want food and drink with your movie. They then charge somewhere around three-times the average consumer rate for the purchase of any item.

This is just bloody insane! It is harder now than ever to get people into a theatre to begin with. The extremely high rates of movie tickets, and the use of cable and DVD, make such outings overly stressful for the majority of consumers. Then, if you manage to find yourself in a place where you can afford it, you find these extremely-high priced soda's.

Based upon historical and contextual notions regarding the concept of evil, and what makes an act "evil", we can learn many things. For instance, tyranny is considered "evil" in almost every tradition imaginable. Tyranny, being defined as a rulers legislative enslavement of the ruled, negates the free expression of a populace, and produces poverty and economic despair.

Hitler was considered a most heinous tyrant. He declared war on all those who did not fit his ideological profile of what a human being should be (nonjewish germans). Most modern people would consider him to be corrupt and evil. Yet, these same people believe in and worship a god who, according to their own textual accounts, commits acts and atrocities every bit as heinous as Hitler ever did. In fact, in comparison to the Christian god, Hitler was a saint!

Defeatist arguments are the primary defense mechanism of the weak-minded.

I have been told on many occasions, when I express opinions regarding laws that I plainly disagree with, that you cannot fight the government. It is a belief that any government wishes their native populace to believe, because a people who think that they cannot fight their government in any fashion is more easily controlled.

Think of this: the early American colonists endured the same form of propaganda. They were told in no uncertain terms that the King and his armies were too powerful. That there was no way to oppose them, and it was folly to even attempt to do so. The vast majority of the people living within the colonies simply endured whatever legislation the King laid down, and submitted themselves to whatever tyrannies might be imposed upon them.

There is a 100% chance that there is no such person as God. 

Too often, activists find themselves confronted by those who desire an advantage.  And too often, activists fall into the trap.  "Scientists would never admit a 100% chance that there is no god, it's just that the probability is so minute.  There is a 99.99999...% chance that there is no god..."

First and foremost, god is a concept.  An idea.  Not a theory.  Following scientific methodology, you follow facts and produce theories.  You do not dream up ideas and then attempt to interpret facts to make those concepts more real.

It has long been the case that people have sought to use law to control the behaviours of other people.

Take alcohol prohibition, for instance. There was a mass appeal, particularly by religious zealots, to deter people from drinking alcohol. "I don't drink, so you can't drink either" was the line of thought. In order to get legislators to listen and enact the probationary laws, consumption of alcoholic beverages was presented as being the cause of crime and corruption.

Of course, such feeble connections rarely hold true. After the enaction of probationary laws, however, anyone who obtained and consumed alcoholic beverages were committing "criminal" activities. Thus, the connection between alcohol and criminal activity became standard.

I have noticed that every hospital I ever see is invariably linked in some way to a christian church organisation. In a community of hospitals here, there are like two or three methodist hospitals, a baptist hospital, a lutheran hospital, and several "St." hospitals.

Does that mean that medicine and medical technology is being controlled by religious organisations? Is the medical establishment invariably a religious entity?

I understand that the early beginnings of what came to be hospitals were religious establishments where priests would pray to the gods (hellenistic) and perform rituals that were supposed to bring healing to the sick. But, in our postenlightenment era, you would think that there would be more hospitals built by scientific establishments instead of having all of them built by religious organisations.

Getting along with others can be very difficult.

On any subject that an opinion is held, those who hold different opinions cannot fathom why anyone would even begin to think differently. There is an essential feeling of wrongness to opposing viewpoints.

Moreover, even people who hold identical views can often find themselves in a position where they are simply tired of being around each other. They grow tired of other voices impeding on their thoughts.

Yet, humans have always lived in groups, from prehistoric times onward. Thus it seems rather disconcerting for us to not want other people around.