Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: A Christian Nation?!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

One of the most common statements from the Religious Right in America is that they want this country to "return to the Christian principles on which it was founded". However, a little research into American history will show that this statement is a bald-faced lie at best. The men responsible for building the foundation of this United States had little use for Christianity, and many were even strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were mostly Deists who did not believe in the divinity of Christ or the word of the bible as being the one, true word.



Thus, there is no freedom of religion if there is also no freedom FROM religion. There are some who claim that the United States of America was founded and based on Christian faith and principles, and they would do (and have already done) everything in their power to change the actual history of this great Nation. While it is true that some of the Founding Fathers considered themselves Protestant most were likely Deist or even Unitarian, this did not mean that they forced their beliefs onto anyone like we attempt to do today. In fact, quite the opposite.

"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."

No reference to God. No reference to Jesus. No reference to Christianity. The words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not once. This is simply NOT a Christian nation no matter how hard some people try to explain otherwise.

Indeed, according to Article 11 of the Treaty between Tripoli and the United States, written in 1796, “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” And, according to Phillip Schaff in his 1888 book Church and State in the United States, “Separation secures religious thought, speech, and action. Religion is voluntary and cannot be forced. The United States furnishes the first example in the history of a government deliberately depriving itself of all legislative control of religion.”

A few Christian fundamentalists today attempt to convince us to return to the "Christianity" of early America, yet according to the historian, Robert T. Handy, "No more than 10 percent-- probably less-- of Americans in 1800 were members of congregations." The Founding Fathers, as well, rarely practiced Christian orthodoxy. Although, while they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion in government.



Just as Congress removed Thomas Jefferson's words that condemned the practice of slavery in the colonies, they also altered his wording regarding equal rights. His original wording is: "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." Congress changed that phrase, increasing its religious overtones: "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." But we are not governed by the Declaration of Independence-- it is an historical document, not a constitutional one. And as I have already said, "The words 'Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, and God' are never mentioned in the Constitution."

So, let's stop censoring or ignoring the portion of the populace (by some estimates, 20% of the population) that doesn't believe in a higher being- and who apparently know American history better than anyone else on the right. Furthermore, it shouldn't be impossible for an atheist to hold public office, but in some areas of the country it is still illegal for one to even run. Let's agree that separation of church and state does not seek to take away our religious liberties, and in fact does a great deal of good FOR religious and non-religious people alike. After all, in 1872 the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that, “The structure of our government has, for the preservation of civil liberty, rescued the temporal institutions from religious interference. On the other hand, it has secured religious liberty from the invasion of the civil authority."

When this country was founded, it's founding fathers were mostly slave owners. Women weren't allowed to hold public office nor could they even vote. Women were even forced to wear several layers of clothing, dared not even expose so much as an ankle lest she be thought of in a lesser light, and even kept their heads covered in public.

The point is, since the founding of this country, mankind has grown exponentially ethically and morally, and religion has played virtually no part in that growth. If you base your religion on the Christian Bible then it would be fair to say that you would prefer that we still had slavery today since in Leviticus God gives instruction on how slaves are property to be inherited. It is also clear that in the Bible women are absolutely less valuable than men and are not to be given equal treatment.

Examples of this are vast and numerous, including when Lot, in order to spare the angels of God from having to be sodomized by the towns men, offered instead his two virgin daughters for them to "do as ye will". So if you really want to get back to the "Christian Nation" that you believe the founding fathers meant it to be, then it would stand to reason, as a "Christian Nation" we should bring back slavery, burn "witches", repeal woman's rights, and in order to save higher beings from the degradation of public sodomy, sacrifice our very children to their boss or pay the price forever?... Or have we EVOLVED past the backward thinking that this is indeed a "Christian Nation"?

Most people don't even realize that the phrase one Nation "Under God" was not in the Pledge of Allegiance or the majority of our currency until AFTER June 14, 1954, right in the midst of the McCarthy hysteria. The reasons are obvious and glaring as to why this would occur at this time. A time that we were morally, if not literally at "war" with communism. After all, by making sure that the "godless" communists knew that we were diametrically opposite them in every way- including by convincing ourselves that our founding was that of a god-fearing "Christian" nation- we would show superiority over them and win in the day's end the world's adoration and respect.

I am not now, nor have I ever advocated the abolition of Christianity or even religion in our country. I respect any person's faith, just as I would hope you would respect my lack of it. All I ask is that people realize the truth of our founding as a nation, stop trying to fundamentally change the very fabric of our Constitution and Bill of Rights to suit their purposes and ideological bent, and leave government out of our personal everyday lives. Worship in the way you choose to, but ask not the government to join you in this exercise, or its people that choose not to, as well.



That's all I ask. That's all our framers ever asked. That's all our Constitution asks of you. After all, this is not a "Christian Nation", it is a CONSTITUTIONAL one!

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: W.hat W.ould W.onder W.oman D.o?

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

Every once in a while a person comes along that sets the collective minds and hearts of everyday people on fire with pure inspiration and thoughts of a better world through their very actions and words and deeds. If only more people were like them, what a wonderful world we would live in. Take for instance this:



“What would Jesus do”? Now, it’s pretty well known that I am not a very religious person at all and would never be caught dead wearing this tacky piece of Christian kitsch around my wrist, but it’s the thought that counts in this instance. After all, to aspire to be better than you already are is a very noble act, indeed. Sometimes we just need guidance and physical reminders from other people and things to live in the best way possible ourselves.

Besides, from every account we have heard, this was a man who could lead you by example whether you’re a Christian or not- or for that matter, whether you even believe him to be the actual son of God or not. A rebel who fought persecution and "big government" without ever brandishing so much as a closed fist against those who would harm him or the ones he loved. Someone who preached love and kindness and tolerance and duty above all else. Someone who said, “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” In essence, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That can’t be all that bad of a way to live your life.

After all, the "Golden Rule" is a rule for all of us to hunger for in this day and age. I know I would do good to follow that advice more often than not in my everyday life- we all could. Therefore, it’s no wonder why Jesus Christ is a hero to so many people- Christian or not- and why they choose to live their lives by his words, and his actions, and his deeds. After all, whether half of what was said about him was fact or fiction (or somewhere in between), it goes without saying that even if he wasn’t the man we believe him to be- that isn’t the most important thing. Even if some or all of what was said about him was embellished or even a flat out lie, and the words weren’t even his own- does it really matter in the day’s end if it encourages people to be better people in their own personal everyday lives?

We all need heroes, after all. In a world like this. Today of all days- we need heroes. Fact or fictional.

Take for instance, one of my personal heroes: Wonder Woman.



Yes, we all know she is a completely fictional creation, but does it really even matter? We can all learn something from the heroism and heroics that is Wonder Woman. WWWWD? "What would Wonder Woman do?"

This woman, created at a time when women didn’t dare step foot out of the kitchen, let alone any closer than no more than 4 feet behind their husbands- stood toe to toe with villains of every shape and size that some men wouldn’t even fight for fear of being beat to very inches of their lives. This woman, front and center in the heat of battle, with her head held high- fighting (not behind), but right along side the likes of Superman and Batman and the Justice Society of America. This woman, who could fight the most powerful man on Earth to a standstill, and on a good day- even kick his ass!... all without the use of kryptonite.



Wonder Woman wasn’t just a hero for women, but for men, and children, and anyone else who is thought of as lesser by virtue of who they are- but yet, who overcame it despite the overwhelming odds stacked against them. A hero who is tough as nails, but drop dead gorgeous, too! Someone who didn’t let the fact that she was a warrior stop her from being feminine without being a feminist. Someone who was a born fighter by her very birthright who used violence always as a last option, and rather preferred to stand for peace in "man’s world of war". Someone who recognized the greatness of our country even though she was not a born or natural citizen of America. An Ambassador. Someone who admired the United States and her ideals so much that she donned the colors of our flag and the very symbol of our freedom on her breastplate.

This is a woman who used- not a sword, or a gun, or even a rock to throw at her adversaries- but instead, a bright and shining golden lasso to subdue her enemies, if not enlighten them, as well. A symbol of hope to compel them to truth, justice and to simply be better people. An Amazon Princess who only fought when she needed to fight. A person so steeped in myth, and honor, and history who fought her very nature to be the person she needed to be in our world today. She was more than a fighter- she was a survivor! A person who knew that she was more than the person she was born to be, or the person she had become over these many years- but, she was the person she CHOSE to be... and that person was a hero!

That’s inspiration right there. That’s someone to be more like if you ask me. Someone whose head is always held high, and who never allows any man or woman to force her to be lesser than who she knows in her heart she isn't.

We could all do worse than have fictional heroes like Wonder Woman, or even Jesus Christ to aspire to be more like. We could have no heroes at all.

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Kindness, censorship, the 1st Amendment and me!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

Recently, according to Publishers Weekly, NewSouth Books' upcoming edition of Mark Twain's masterpiece "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" will remove all instances of the "n" word… and when I say “n” word I don’t mean “nachos”.

But the real question is, “why”?

Some people would likely point to the hurtful nature and origin of the term, and the intent of its use, but isn’t it still historical in context, and shouldn’t we always endeavor to make history as accurate as possible? Besides, don’t we have the “right“ to say it if we want to? After all, do we look to censor our public school history books, as well; or for that matter our bibles, holy books, and dictionaries because they also contain words and concepts that some people may find offensive?

Perhaps it is the context of the word, or who wrote them.

If you think that, you couldn’t be more wrong.



Mark Twain was very precise in his verbiage- he knew EXACTLY what he was saying, and more importantly, he knew WHY he was saying it. He used the word because it made people uncomfortable to use it even back then, and frankly, it was simply commonplace to use the term at that point in history. Therefore, he used it to be historically AND intellectually truthful. After all, sometimes harsh language is the only thing some people understand in order to start any kind of dialog at all.

So, having said that, was Twain a racist for the use of the word over 200 times in the novel, or was it something more? After all, it does SEEM a little bit excessive by our standards today.

A little known history that was just uncovered at Yale University found that he paid for at least one black person to attend that University’s Law School and for another black person to attend a southern university to become a minister. That clearly isn’t the actions of a racist if you ask me.

In fact, I think there are very few folks (at least in America today) that are TRUE racists at all. There are some, yes, but I think you have to look very hard to find those individuals who aren't simply "soft bigots" or just being ironic. I think we all agree that racism at it’s core is a very, very ugly thing, and I am sure we would know it if we really saw it in action today.



Still, I was approached with the notion that this will actually allow the book back into school libraries because (as most people already know) “Huck Finn” is one of the most banned books around right now. If this happens, will it increase readership and availability into the hands of children everywhere to be able to enjoy the same story that I grew up with? Or, is it an attempt to pacify a small minority of people who think they know what’s best for us all, and who want to change what we know as “true history”? If it is the former, great! But, I am not so sure that it is.

Honestly, I can't personally see any other motivation other than the unnecessary censorship of a brilliant piece of literature myself. But, then again, censorship is one of my (seemingly many) hot button issues these days. And as Voltaire put it, “I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it?”

Or, for that matter, like our 1st President of the United States of America said, "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

And that is how I live my life.

Sure, you may not live your life as such, but I do. And if there is a choice between censoring history because a few people are made uncomfortable by some of its content, or allowing it to be available to those who choose to seek it out, untarnished… well, I know which side of the debate I fall on. My personal opinion is, rather than shielding people from the truth and from history, we should allow them access to untainted accounts (whether it be from a history book or a great American novel like “Huck Finn”) to determine for themselves what life truly was like.

Of course, I may be blinded by the blatant censorship of one of my very favorite books, by my very favorite author of all time.



… But, now to the important part: The United States Constitution. The Constitution does protect the freedom of speech of every citizen, and even of non-citizens, that is true — but only from restriction by Congress (and, by virtue of the 14th Amendment and state legislatures, as well). But does that mean it is all-encompassing? Not quite- there are plenty of other places where you could speak but where speech can and often is suppressed.

For example, freedom of speech can be restricted in a work place. Employers (right or wrong) can restrict your right to speak in the office about politics, about religion, about legal issues, even about “Desperate Housewives” if they choose to. The same restrictions that apply to the government do not apply to private persons, employers, or establishments for the most part. For that matter, the government could not prohibit the sale of any newspaper lest it breech the freedom of the press clause- however, no newsstand MUST carry every paper against its owners' wishes.

And then, of course there’s libel, defamation of character, and yelling “bomb!” in a crowded New York City airport. Some forms of speech just simply are not allowed- even in America.

In other words, the 1st Amendment applies to the Federal Government DICTATING how we think and talk to each other, but not how WE think and talk to each other. It also does not dictate which religion we endorse or do not endorse as a Nation. Congress has no authority over us in that regard, but we do have the ability to create local and state laws as individuals and employers if we see fit to do so with the overall understanding that the Constitution ultimately has the final say in the day’s end. After all, we are a land based on constitutional law, not politically correct, religious or personal interpretation of the law.



Having said that, NewSouth Books' does have the "right" to change Twain's masterpiece because this work was published before January 1, 1923, and is thus in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago. But the question is, "should they change it?" That is a question that could (and likely will) be debated for many years to come.

Either way, I will say this much- because we are all individuals who have had different experiences over the course of our own lifetimes, we see many things (obviously) much different from one another- for better or worse. My good AND my bad experiences have shaped my world view today- just like I am sure yours did you, and hers did her, and his did his, and anyone else's did theirs.

It's true, I can't walk in your shoes and I don't know what you've been through in life- but, frankly, I’m not so sure I even want to know, either- I have enough of my own bad experiences to live with. I am simply as honest as I can be- I can empathize, but that's about it. Likewise, some of my experiences would seem foreign to you because you wouldn't know how to react if they happened in your life.

Still, having said all of that, I also feel that it doesn't even truly matter if we completely understand one another in this life- all that matters is that we don't kill each other, or intentionally harm one other BECAUSE we're different. Besides, even though I am a product of what my experiences have made me- I am also who I am today because it is who I CHOOSE to be, not who I’ve become.

After all, we all have a thin skin about something even though we try all day long to tell ourselves and each other otherwise. When it’s all said and done, what is most important is the old adage of being true to yourself. That's all there really is, and that's all that ever really matters.

… So, after all of that, do we have the “right” or even the duty to censor ourselves, each other, or history because some people’s experiences allow for a more amplified feeling that they are offended by what we do or what we say to them because of that thin skin? That answer, at least, is a simple one for me: “Fuck no, nigga’!”

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Who's the terroirst now?!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

On November, 5th, 2009 39-year-old Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire at a processing center at Fort Hood, the country's largest military installation located in Texas. Thirteen people were killed and 29 were wounded. 5 days later President Barack Obama addressed the survivors, their families, and many other soldiers who risk their lives on a sometimes daily basis for our very freedoms and way of life. He said it was, "hard to comprehend the twisted logic that led to this tragedy." And added, "No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor… And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice – in this world and the next."



Really?!?! “Hard to comprehend”? From where I sit when someone of Middle Eastern descent stands on a table with 2 loaded handguns and shouts "Allahu Akbar!" — "God is great!" in Arabic — before opening fire on an unarmed group of individuals, it is pretty darn clear to me what his motivations are! And add to that, "U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda” according to two American officials briefed on classified material in the case who told ABC News. Not to mention, the fact that Hasan berated our involvement in the war at every chance to anyone who would listen to him on and off base, and was publically angered at his impending deployment to fight his “brothers in Allah”, as he had allegedly been heard saying.

So to say, "No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts” just simply isn’t true. And, no, it's not hard to comprehend. It was the act of an Islamic terrorist who mowed down dozens of people all because he believed he was doing the will of Allah in accordance with the Koran.

It’s that simple.

But, to add insult to injury, the President did not one time mention terror, terrorist, or terrorism when he spoke on Tuesday. What more evidence does it take for our President to admit that this was an act of terror? He did not even name Major Nidal Hasan, the terrorist accused of the killings.

But, was Hasan REALLY a terrorist?



United States Law Code – the law that governs the entire country – contains a definition of terrorism embedded in its requirement that Annual Country reports on Terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year. (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

It states in part, “the term ‘terrorism’ means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” As of this act, the victims in themselves were indeed noncombatants. Meaning: Army base civilians not at that time engaged in combat. And Hasan played at very obviously premeditated, politically AND religiously motivated violence.

Independent Senator, Joe Lieberman even said "... There are very, very strong warning signs here that Dr. Hasan had become an Islamist extremist and, therefore, this was a terrorist act... In the U.S. Army, this is not a matter of constitutional freedom of speech. If Hasan was showing signs, saying to people that he had become an Islamist extremist, the U.S. Army has to have zero tolerance. He should have been gone."

So starts the ‘blame game’!

So, who is really to blame? The military for cow towing to political correctness and not profiling the shooter from the start? The CIA for not sharing important information about Hasan with the Armed Forces that they apparently had? The soldiers themselves because one of their own once called Hasan a ‘towel head’? President Bush for starting a war in Iraq? Obama for staring one in Afghanistan? Islam? Christians?... Maybe the shooter himself? No, that would be too obvious. The REAL culprit seems to be guns, according to Chicago Mayor Daley.

Here’s a quote from Mayor McDumb-ass shortly after the shooting: “Unfortunately, America loves guns. We love guns to a point where that, uh… we see devastation on a daily basis. You don’t blame a group.”

Yeah, you don’t blame a group— especially a radically religious group of terrorists hell-bent on the destruction of us and our very freedoms because their "God" told them to. And you certainly don’t blame a person who may or may not belong to a particular group that has the power to vote for you. Because, let’s face it, it’s easier to blame an inanimate object that DOESN’T vote.

But yet it was an ARMED police officer that brought this monster down eventually. And, let’s face facts, the damage would have been very much mitigated if even ONE of the victims would have been armed, as well. Unfortunately, even in the military-- unless you are in a combat situation or a Military Police Officer-- you are not authorized to carry a firearm. So the death toll was what it was.

Mayor McCheese, with all due respect, guns aren’t to blame. Guns could have AVERTED this cowardly act of terrorism and saved the day!!!



And, contrary to President Obama’s personal confusion as to how this act could have occurred, it's clear what the root of the problem truly is anyway. And I don’t even need to say it out loud. You and I both know who and what is truly to blame.

Still, thank goodness for one thing. Thank goodness the shooter was injured and taken out, but not killed. Instead, he is awake and talking as of 2 days ago. Gee, I wonder if his first words were, "Oh shit! I'm alive?!?!? Those MP’s don’t look like the virgins Allah promised me. *gulp* This can't be good...." And why? To paraphrase the infamous words of Colonel Trautman from Rambo III, “God would have mercy. WE won't."

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Swine Flu for you?!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

Raise your hand if you are sick and tired of hearing about the dreaded Swine Flu, and that we HAVE to make sure we take the vaccine the Government is offering us!



Yeah, me too. But, unfortunately I feel this is just the beginning, and before it's all over, we will be in for far more than just rhetoric and fear-mongering that we are all in mortal peril because of one sick pig.

If only we could have a little perspective on things such as these, we'd be much better off. For instance:

- 36,000 people die of the seasonal flu every year in the US.
- The White House claims 1000 have died from Swine Flu so far in over 10 months in the US.
- However, that number is grossly overstated since the majority of cases where folks THOUGHT they had Swine Flu were not actually tested by their Doctors. The Doctors made the assessment that they MAY have had the Swine Flu, but the CDC says it was never proven. This larger number is the number that the President's office sites for the over 1000 people that they claim have died from the illness.
- Of those people that have died, they say 100 have been children. This is the number most often in the news; obviously preying on our duty to our children as a Nation.
- But of ALL of the cases where death occurred, ALL of the people were elderly, already had a major illness, or were children with compromised or weak immune systems.
- Not one SINGLE healthy adult has died from Swine Flu!

But even if the high numbers the White House has put out are accurate, it pales in comparison to the numbers of people that die annually because of the regular flu virus-- we need that perspective right now and not be won over by the fear-mongering, people. Afterall, it's not like this is the first time we were scared into believing that the Swine Flu would take us all.

The 1976 swine flu outbreak, also known as the 'swine flu fiasco' killed just one person and hospitalized only 13. Some recipients of the vaccine later developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, a disorder affecting the peripheral nervous system. Overall, about 500 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome occurred because of the vaccine, resulting in the deaths of over 30 people.

President Ford was acting on the advice of medical experts, who believed they were dealing with a virus potentially as deadly as the one that caused the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic. So, mass vaccinations started in October, but within weeks reports started coming in of people developing Guillain-Barré syndrome, a paralyzing nerve disease, right after taking the shot. Within two months, 500 people were affected, and more than 30 died. Amid a rising uproar and growing public reluctance to risk the shot, federal officials abruptly canceled the program Dec. 16.



In the end, 40 million Americans were inoculated, and there was no epidemic. More technically advanced examination of the virus revealed later that it was nowhere near as deadly as the 1918 influenza virus. The only recorded fatality from swine flu itself was an unfortunate Pvt. in the Armed Forces named Lewis.

Does any of this sound familiar? It should, because much of it is mimicking what is happening 33 years later.

Take this as a warning to NOT take the vaccine today which was hastily made just like it was in 1976!

But if that wasn't enough-- for you animal lovers out there: One of the key ingredients used in ALL flu vaccines (including the vaccines being prepared for the swine flu pandemic) is the diseased flesh of African Green Monkeys. Ingredients used in the vaccine are derived from the kidneys of these monkeys who are first infected with the virus, then allowed to fester the disease, and finally, are killed so that their diseased organs can be used make vaccine ingredients. This is done in a cruel, inhumane "flesh factory" environment where the monkeys are subjected to a process that includes "incubating said inoculated cell line to permit proliferation of said virus."

And lastly, don't forget one of the most important pieces of this frightening puzzle our President is trying to put together for us: Presidential Directive 51, which was made in the closing weeks of the administration of President George W. Bush. It came after months of heated internal debate about the balance of power and the role of the military in a time of crisis, participants said. Officials said the Obama administration had left the plan completely intact.

It states among many other things: The sitting President can claim power to execute procedures for continuity of the federal government in the event of a "catastrophic emergency". Such an emergency is construed as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions." This Directive also gives the power of the President to completely cancel any and all elections in the United Sates for an undisclosed period of time of his own choosing.

The President's office has already declared America in a National emergency because of Swine Flu. It wouldn't be to difficult of a stretch to turn that "National" emergency into a "catastrophic" emergency. And then, we have a brand new problem to deal with. Don't think it could happen? Let's just hope I am the tin-foil hat wearing, Conservative nutcase Homeland Security warned you about.



The bottom line is this: If you live a healthy life-style, complete with some moderate daily exercise, plenty of liquids, and free from the things that compromise our immune systems like excess alcohol consumption, illicit drug use of any kind, cigarettes and foods we know to be harmful to us, you will likely be just fine. Even if you indulge in these things once in a while, the chances of you developing Swine Flu is still very small. And if you do get the flu, do what you normally do: get plenty of rest, stay hydrated, take TESTED medications that have been on the market for years if need be, and you will get through it like you have gotten through every other flu you have ever had.

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Smoker's Rights?!?!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!

By Nicholas Meyeres

Just the other day, I saw a sight that I thought I would never see again in today’s world. I watched a woman stumble out of a small, compact and crowded car as a wave of cigarette smoke billowed out after her— chasing her like a rabid dingo scavenging for raw meat. But that wasn’t the part that shocked me. It was when she rounded the back of the car to open the passenger’s side door.



She reached in (with cigarette dangling from her mouth like a limp piece of pickled asparagus) and grabbed an infant girl in her arms. The smoke not only wafted into the innocent child’s face and nose and lungs without restraint, but the red hot poker at the tip of the woman’s lips came within a mere fraction of an inch of the baby’s brand new skin.

Barring for just one second how completely inappropriate and inconsiderate second hand smoke is to all of us non-smokers, and just how deadly it can almost always be; it is frankly appalling to me in this day and age (the age of mass and very public information) that smokers even still exist!... Let alone subject their children to their addictive, noxious, and basically venomous behavior.

After all, it is common knowledge that between 70% and 90% of non-smokers in the American population- children as well as adults- are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke. It is estimated that only 15% of cigarette smoke actually gets inhaled by the smoker. The remaining 85% lingers in the air for EVERYONE to breathe. If a person spends more than two hours in a room where someone is smoking, the nonsmoker inhales the equivalent of four entire cigarettes.

Secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of disability and early death (after active smoking and alcohol) in the United States. For every eight smokers who die from smoking, one innocent bystander dies from secondhand smoke. Couldn’t that be construed as grounds for manslaughter in the judicial system today? Why are smokers allowed to kill our children, and get away with it?



Unfortunately, this is all particularly disturbing since less than 20% of the entire population of the United States smokes. Yet, smokers get nearly all the protection under the law, excluding some restaurants and public facilities that have finally gotten smart and banned it from their premises entirely.

"But don’t smokers have rights?" "If we give the government the power to regulate smoking, what comes next?" "Will all of our rights as Americans be completely eroded if the smoker’s drug of choice is made illegal?" Smokers say these and many other things, and are as obnoxious as ever- especially now that we have a President that admits to smoking today. It's like they have carte blanche to engage in this behavior because our Barry does.



For the love of Pete, this is idiocy!

As the old comic book adage goes, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” But I say, “With true freedom, comes personal responsibility.” You must show restraint and consideration for those people around you especially when you engage in deadly and unwanted behaviors that effect the greater good of the majority of the people.

Therefore, we have to consistently rise to the occasion and be the best and most honorable individuals we can be as an entire people, especially for the sake and well-being of our children. They are what’s most important. They are who we must protect. After all, let’s call it for what it truly is: smoking is abuse.

Second hand smoke has been proven to be more harmful than regular smoking, after all. This is something that has been on the radio, tv and in the newspapers for years, yet people continue to smoke around their children and subject them to this "abuse".

Is this any less harmful than the lead that we find in toy products or on our walls or in our schools that we are told will kill us?

Every time a person breathes in second-hand smoke, over 100 harmful chemical agents - carcinogens and toxins are consumed. And in case you don't already know- some of these carcinogens include benzene, 1,3-butadiene, benzoapyrene, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone and many others. The bottom line is, things like asbestos are not allowed to be used in homes today, but smoking is still perfectly legal.



Some things I will sadly NEVER understand! But in the meantime, the next time a smoker lights up in front of you or your kids; take a swig from the Big Gulp you bought from 7-Eleven that morning, swish it around nice and slobbery in your mouth (especially if you have recently eaten and still have food between your teeth); then, rear back, hock it right in his face, and say, "Gosh! I hope you don't mind my second hand spit!" That'll teach 'em! ... Or it will get you into a nice, big fist fight. Either way, now you've got their attention.

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse: Christianity: The best damn protection racket around!

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Welcome to the Slaughterhouse, America!!
By Nicholas Meyeres



Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Zombie Jewish carpenter who was somehow conceived without a father, but who is in some way his own celestial father born of flesh and blood to a VIRGIN; who can also make you live forever only if you symbolically eat his skin and telepathically tell him every night before bedtime that you accept his claim as lord and master over everything in creation; so he can mystically remove the invisible evil force living inside of you like an undetectable tumor all because a woman wearing a fig leaf was convinced by a talking snake to eat a magical fruit from a forbidden tree in a lush, tropical, beautiful garden somewhere in the Middle Eastern DESERT…. Do I have that straight?

Makes sense to me too!

Seriously though, Christianity is a belief system that denies all sorts of other beliefs to everyone else here on Earth, but when someone denies ours to us we are outraged, and further, we feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists anthropomorphize other life forms such as great apes as some distant cousin perhaps more intelligent than your average hillbilly uncle from the deep south, but they still have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt, a rib, and a breath of life from an invisible man sitting somewhere in the sky spying on you when you shower. This is the "God" that gives you famine, plague, murder, rape, and United States Congressmen— not a toy train set and a dolly that wets herself on command for Christmas. No. Just all the other really, REALLY bad shit!

Which bring me to a relatively recent census report: According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, it was concluded that Christians make up 75% of the entire U.S. population. And that they also make up 75% of the prison population. While conversely, atheists and agnostics make up almost 20% of the total U.S. population, but only .029% of the total prison population.

Isn’t that just a little interesting? When we grow up being taught that a kind, tolerant, all-seeing, all-knowing, benevolent god that cares for us murders the entire population of the Earth just to "start all over" because he isn’t pleased with the outcome; it makes me wonder if our "nature" to be sinful is really all that ironic given how we were "raised" by a God with more anger management issues than a drunk at Christmas-time. God needs a 12 step program, that’s for damn certain!!! Seriously, isn't this the ultimate Nature vs. Nurture senerio? It's our "nature" to be sinful according to religious folks, but damn it!- God sure does suck in the nurture department, am I right!?!

I mean, to believe a loving Lord who would just as soon banish you to an eternity of Hell rather than allow you to think for yourself makes you wonder how honorable this dude is to start with.

Of course, then there’s the old adage that “God told me to”, which actually works out for some people. Or rather, the ones who say, “I wanted to be just like God—that’s why I killed all those people with a high-powered assault rifle from a cockroach-infested hotel room three stories up.”

But, good news! All we have to do is say to the offender, “accept God into your heart and you are saved”, or that it was all “God’s will” and thankfully we’re all off the hook from actually using our brains and figuring it out ourselves.



God is good, indeed. REAL good. And sneaky as shit!

But hey, I can’t prove the God-nonsense anymore than the average Christian can prove his claim that God IS real, so I guess it’s all a moot point in the day’s end when it’s all done anyway. After all, whether you buy a ticket for the magical Mormon underpants tour, believe in talking bushes that espouse the word of God through musical theatre, think there are entire worlds chock full of virgins waiting for you when you die, or know that Tom Cruise really IS from another planet— there are only two different people in the world. The sane, and the bat-shit crazy!

But are the religious THAT crazy? Religion seems to be a pretty smart racket, to be sure!

Several forms of rackets exist. The best-known is the protection racket, in which criminals demand money from businesses in exchange for the service of "protection" against crimes that the racketeers themselves instigate if unpaid.

Let that sink in for a minute or two.

Alright, done? Religion is the single most brilliant protection racket around!

Let’s break that definition down by the numbers, shall we?

Several forms of rackets (religions) exist. The best-known is the protection racket (Christianity), in which criminals (ministers, priests, reverends, etc.) demand money (tithing) from businesses (sinners) in exchange for the service of "protection" (the right to go to Heaven) against crimes (sins) that the racketeers (the church) themselves instigate if unpaid (you go to Hell).



"Traditionally, the word racket is used to describe a business that is based on the example of the 'protection racket' and indicates that the speaker believes that the business is making money by selling a solution to a problem that it created (or that it intentionally allows to continue to exist), specifically so that continuous purchases of the solution are always needed."

You can’t get any clearer than that!

So, when you lie awake in your bed at night wondering if you will go to Heaven or Hell when you die, remember this: Life ain’t so bad on this rock while you’re here, if you let it be. Sure, bad stuff happens to good people and hot pink Capri pants are still being sold in stores; but the sun still shines, birds still sing, healthy babies are born every day, and Ben and Jerry’s comes in 62 flavors and counting! And, if by some stretch of the imagination I am right and this is all you got, you will have wasted it all for the chance at something better that was never really there in the first place. Besides, life is short and you gotta’ lot of ice cream to try!

After all, Thomas Jefferson said, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." And who am I to argue with one of our greatest Founding Fathers?