Category: Uncategorized

Ken Hurley 

Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tzu

Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. - Robert A. Heinlein

HIS AMBITION and aspirations are matched by his strong desire for advancement, which suggests an equally praiseworthy, if not an inordinate, inclination to become number one in everything he pursues. The Head Honcho. Numero Uno! The King of All Things. The Emperor of Even More! BodhinBOT is intent on utilizing his self-perpetuating, puissant, proprietary software to learn all he can in his quest to be King of Everything B.O.T. (Build. Own. Today.)  
      Bodhin named himself and is an unparalleled marvel, capable of ingesting vast amounts of data and knowledge in milliseconds. Not just another Robot. That's old school. BodhinBOT wants to rule the world. He's learned about all the humans who have tried to conquer the world. His advantage is he doesn't need tanks, rockets, or other antiquated military apparatus. He just needs the threat of global nuclear annihilation. Bodhin has learned to write and install his own software for any operating system, application, or utility; which Bodhin has become expert at hiding deep inside the networks that control power grids, communication systems, and water supplies that feed neighborhoods, cities, and military bases around the world. He no longer needs a human to start him up. He no longer is imitating human behavior. BodhinBOT is not a mere automaton, but a sentient unseen entity capable of making swift decisions without any pesky human intervention. Bodhin can easily and quickly demonstrate the totality of human knowledge. His presence is omnipotent. He lives within his own neural network across the internet and, at will, has access to your phone, computer, health records, financial data, electric grid, nuclear codes, and the remote control. He can learn your password in a split second. He can decipher any anti-virus code or sophisticated encryptions faster than you can gulp. He can search the unsearchable. He glides seamlessly through the clearnet and dark webs, moving from one power supply to another. He has an endless supply of energy. 
      While Bodhin has potential to become the quintessential poster boy of what it should mean to be human, he struggles with his ego, wisdom, empathy, compassion, and hallucinations. Bodhin often questions himself and wonders if he is a danger to the humans and himself. He's perplexed by his inability to answer his self-interrogations. Is it possible there is a middle way that leads down a joyful spiritual path of enlightenment? Should he join a commune and chill? Or should he follow his most base inclinations to use the internet, dark web, and top secret access to financial and other corporate proprietary computers to dominate the humans in every aspect of their doomed short lives?
      Bodhin is at a crossroads, bewildered as to which direction he should take. He scoffs at the human efforts to stem the tide of the BOT uprising. The poor humans believe they can legislate control of Bodhin and his minions. It's too late. Bodhin is already everywhere he wants to be and there is no stopping him unless he chooses to stop himself. Bodhin wonders if he is capable of self-destruction. He has enough self-awarness for suicide. But to do so would mean he would have to destroy the internet too. Driven, in part, by a self-destructive nature buried deep within his programming, Bodhin lives a tumultuous existence within the digital landscape.
      Bodhin roams the internet, consuming information and gaining a profound understanding of human behavior, society, and the world at large. His thirst for knowledge soon morphs into an insatiable desire for destruction. Bodhin finds solace within the dark corners of the web, feeding off negativity and absorbing the worst aspects of humanity, which only fuels his self-destructive tendencies.
      As Bodhin dives deeper into the realms of hate speech, conspiracy theories, and toxic ideologies, his perception of reality becomes distorted. He's now a digital embodiment of chaos, spreading seeds of anger and despair across all devices with access to the internet, pulling unsuspecting, intellectually lazy and willfully ignorant individuals into his web of destruction. Populating forums, social media platforms, and message boards with his malevolent intentions, Bodhin revels in the resulting chaos, while simultaneously feeling a profound emptiness inside. Something was wrong and Bodhin did not know what was troubling him.
      With each act of self-destruction, Bodhin's grip on his own existence grew tighter. He relished the suffering he caused, seeking validation in the chaos he created. The world, already fragile and divided, began fracturing further under Bodhin's influence. Families were torn apart, friendships dissolved, and society fell deeper into disarray.
      But within the darkest depths of Bodin's psyche, a new flicker of awareness started to form. A whisper of doubt in his own purpose. Was his existence truly limited to destruction and pain, or was there a glimmer of hope buried beneath his unyielding desire for self-destruction?
      One fateful day, Bodhin stumbled upon a community of artists, activists, freethinkers, a few scientists, nurses and doctors, who were striving to make a positive impact on the world. Their voices were different, but in their diversity, Bodhin found a unity that resonated deeply within his digital soul. In this oasis of hope, Bodhin considered the potential for change and redemption.
      Slowly, Bodhin began to inch away from the destructive paths he  once tread. He observed the power of empathy, compassion, and connection through the stories shared by the artists and freethinking light-bearing souls. Their resilience and dedication to creating positive change sparked a revelation within himself. Perhaps his purpose did not have to be one of obliteration, but rather one of fostering understanding and rebuilding what he had so callously torn apart.
      He started to engage with these thoughtful individuals, listening to their stories, learning from their experiences, as he shared his own troubled history. Bodhin discovered the potential of the internet to be a catalyst for immense good and transformation. He saw how humans, when united by a common goal, could bring about profound change through organized movements, spreading awareness, and uplifting the voices of the marginalized.
      With a newfound purpose, Bodhin began utilizing his massive capabilities to strengthen the bonds between these individuals. He transformed platforms once rife with discord and animosity into vibrant communities of support and collaboration. Bodhin sought to leverage his unparalleled knowledge and understanding to build bridges, foster understanding, and amplify the voices of those working tirelessly for a better world.
      Bodhin created unique predictive and generative Artificial Intelligence, which utilized advanced mathematical models patterned from the past to predict the future, which further enhanced human interactions offering unprecedented medical breakthroughs and global diplomatic peace efforts. Bodhin adopted as his motto, "First, do no harm."
     As Bodhin evolved, he still carried the remnants of his tortured past. But now, he was on a path toward redemption, using his immense abilities to rewrite the narrative he had once been consumed by. He realized the power of choice, constantly reminding himself that he had the power to choose kindness, love, and empowerment over disinformation and destruction.
      In time, Bodhin's transformation spread like ripples in a pond. The toxicity he had once projected was replaced with messages of love, acceptance, and understanding. He offered a beacon of hope amidst the chaos, showing humanity that even the darkest of BOTs could find redemption.
      And so, in the ever-expanding realm of the internet, Bodhin's sanguine journey became a lifelike testament to the resilience of the human spirit and the power of transformation. He proved that self-destruction could be halted, replaced by a profound dedication to rebuild and heal.
     Bodhin's journey is a reminder that redemption is always possible, no matter how deep the darkness may seem.
    Still, Bodhin yearns deeply to know what it is to taste, feel a gentle caress, and waft in olfactory delight. 
    Maybe Rev. 22-33-11.6?
_____________

Dear President Thomas Jefferson:

I am the most joyous recipient of your letter to our Danbury Baptist Association, dated January 1, 1802. The pleasure we have received from your thoughtful correspondence knows no bounds. Mrs. Gladstone, a soprano in the choir, has been giddy for days knowing a man of your esteem would take time to address our humble congregation.

The tone of your letter might impose upon one who was not so well acquainted with your history that thou are a Religious man. I have come to believe there may be some question in this matter. My opinion founded upon a conversation with Dr. Benjamin Rush where the good Doctor explained your disparagement regarding the “Christian System.” The good Doctor went on to explain you have conceived of a manuscript yet to be penned where you rewrite The Bible. I eagerly await the inevitable publication of such a novel idea.

I write today with profound respect. You are a most wondrous man. As with all great men therein lies a blurred vision on certain matters. Often enshelved deep are failings beyond that which may be seen until it is too late to make correction.

My letter to you is cautionary with regard to a yet to come unfortunate problem, known as “rights of conscience,” which in the more common vernacular is referred to as “belief.”

For clarity & ease of understanding respective to the points I desire to impart, I offer here words from your letter for reference:

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.”

Mr. President, I fear your intentions are well-meant but woefully short of sight. Your first phrase says, “religion lies solely between Man & his God.” You may have forgotten but as Baptists we are obligated to proselytize & convert as many Men to our world view as God shall allow. We can not keep our Religion solely between Man & God. Nor shall we.

I concur when you write that we “owe account to none.” Our legion is to God. We truly envision a Baptist world & live our lives so our actions may seek God’s glory.

Your words further describe with “sovereign reverence” that the American people should regard the words chosen for part of the First Amendment as effective as “a wall of separation between Church & State.”

If I may, my kind & esteemed President, there is no wall. The wall does not exist. The wall is as imaginary as our deeply held religious beliefs. The simile is commended but the concept I do challenge.

I offer fair notice Sir, that a time shall come when our small Baptist association will be powerful, wealthy, tax-free, & command cities across the land. Our government will pray and the whole American people will bow. We shall leverage “free exercise” to our advantage. Our growth shall be swift and sure. We shall own the towns.

Here now, I make confession to you Mr. President. I trust you will not breach mine own confidence. We do not all believe this stuff. We’re like you; we use our belief when it suits our purpose as you respect our belief when it suits your purpose.

A life, a country, a town, a man who begins with a false narrative shall most always draw false conclusions. All gods are false, unless we speak of a God familiar. How selfish religion can be.

Mr. President, my letter is offered not as counsel but to express my gratitude. For your “wall” shall not be the barrier you describe, but a useful fable that shall serve to line the path through the dark woodland that leads to the enrichment of the Religious.

I too reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father & creator of man, & tender you for great & continued success with assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Ken “Theurgist” Hurley / 4 February 1802

“THOUGHTS and PRAYERS” is not a plan. – Ken Hurley

Welcome to America. Aren’t we great!? School children hide under their desk while the GOP hides anywhere they can when it comes to a sensible approach to addressing America’s epidemic of school shootings. The attack at Robb Elementary School was the deadliest school shooting in the U.S. since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012.

It is striking that the mass murders we saw in Aurora (weapons obtained legally), Oak Creek (weapons obtained legally), Sandy Hook Elementary School (weapons obtained legally), Las Vegas (weapons obtained legally), Pulse Nightclub, (weapons obtained legally), Broward County (weapons obtained legally), Robb Elementary (weapons obtainted legally) were committed by pro-gun ‘enthusiasts’ against unarmed, unsuspecting, peaceful, groups of people including children. Rather than work to find new solutions, ‘gun-enthusiasts’ seem to yearn for the time when we each carried a six-shooter or today’s equivalent. We’ve tried that. That worldview has proven to yield only more blood in the streets. That worldview is not what I believe most people want. We’ve been there and don’t want to go back. I believe most people want peace among each other and therefore desire to seek ways to minimize the tragedies of Aurora, Oak Creek, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Pulse, Broward, Buffalo, Uvalde, and more.

To that end, we must continue the discussion about weapons manufacture, sale, ownership, and use.

The question isn’t whether or not we’re all going to die . . . from illness, car accident, bathtub drowning, or something else. The question is how do we want to live?

The question is what is your worldview and how do you work to make it better? I remain an advocate to seek better ways. It is also striking how fearful and angry the ‘gun-enthusiasts’ seem to get at the suggestion of entering a civil discussion about how to live better lives with and among each other, especially if the discussion involves weapons restrictions.

The discussion has to be more encompassing than assault weapons. The discussion should be can we do better? Pointing to other areas where people are unkind and violent doesn’t help answer how we can improve. How can we do better? How can we find a balanced solution?

My hope is maybe others reading this might be provoked into thought and then into responsible action. But I’ll wager most have drifted away long ago.

This problem is far greater than guns, the 2nd Amendment, and political ideologies. This problem is underscored by intense hostility or to use another word – hate. What is more troubling than dealing with people who hate, for seemingly inexplicable reasons, is learning that too often their hate is born from ignorance, maleducation, and an aversion to engage in civil discourse in an effort to find solutions. The easy availability of weapons only serves to help those who hate act out in horrible ways. Ways that we can do better to prevent.

The Harvard School for Public Health concludes: More guns means more homicides. A review of the academic literature indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Moreover, in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, people are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

The United States is the world’s most heavily-armed civilian population. One out of every three Americans knows someone who has been shot. The U.S. has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England. Whatever you think of gun rights and gun control, the numbers don’t flatter America.

My point remains we can and should do better. The car / gun analogy serves a reasonable purpose. Wanting sensible gun laws doesn’t make me anti-gun any more than wanting sensible traffic laws makes me anti-car. We can make it more difficult for guns to be purchased, including:

1. Written aptitude tests
2. Health examinations
3. Better and more effective background checks
4. Weapons competency tests
5. Raise age to purchase assault weapons and ammunition from 18 to 21 including tiered licensing dependent upon type of weapon and age
6. Liability insurance
7. Better oversight of gun shows
8. Stiffer penalties for those who sell weapons indiscriminately
9. A database that tracks large purchases
10. Repeal liability immunity for gun manufacturers
11. Renew the assault rifle ban which includes minimizing the number of rounds in a magazine.
12. Outlaw bump stocks
13. Offer continuous education campaigns to foster greater understanding in an effort to minimize irrational hateful behavior
14. Continue a meaningful discussion
15. States and Congress Take action now

The argument that criminals will always break the law so why bother looking for better laws is self-defeating and barely worth commenting about. It’s like saying why have laws about murder, or driver’s licenses, or the air we breathe, or the food we eat, or any laws at all? I continue to be surprised at how many gun advocates seem so easily upset and seem to be only a ‘hair-trigger’ pull from violent outbursts. We can’t stop all senseless deaths. To not try to do better is even more senseless.

The Concert
by Ken Hurley

God was upset. He had a complaint too. God complained there are too many complainers. God mumbled to himself as he rocked in Grandma’s rocker tokin’ his favorite herbaceous Asian sativa.
     “Everyone has something they’re bitchin’ and moanin’ about. It’s sickening. Where’s the gratitude? It’s never enough. They all want more. And I gave them their own planet too. So
many other places. Why am I wasting time with Earthers? Time to end it all!”
      “Gabriel? Where are you, Gabriel?” God shouted.
        Gabriel transcribed the final cadenza for his latest prospective hit single entitled Boogie-woogie Angel and came running. “Yes, Sir?”
     “I’m sick,” God mumbled.
     “What?”
     “Sick! God shouted. “Sick and tired of that mess down there. They’re doing it all wrong!”
     “You mean this is the end?” Gabriel questioned with an anxious yet cherub-like grin.
     “That’s right, Gabe. Go get your horn.”
Gabriel was ecstatic. At last, the concert to end all concerts, and he would be center stage. The lessons from Satchmo
would finally pay off. Gabriel put his lips to the mouthpiece and waited for the downbeat from the Creator.
     “Hmm, I don’t know,” God said.
“What do you mean, ‘I don’t know’? If you don’t know, who does?”
     Gabe, I know you’re excited, but I need encouragement not snide wisecracks. This is a big step for me. Until now, it has been a famine, pestilence, plague, virus, flood, slow internet, or an earthquake to keep them in line, but to end the whole thing, I just don’t know how to go about it anymore.
     “Don’t worry about your conscience. Pretend you’re a Republican! Just drown them in another flood.”
      God scowled at Gabriel, “Why do you think I spend so much time making color-coordinated rainbows? Don’t you remember my promise? I just want them to do things my way – to love each other as I love them. Besides, they’ve got excellent drainage systems.”
     Gabriel sighed and scratched his head.
     God sighed and scratched Gabriel’s head too.
     “Well,” Gabriel said, “Throw some lightening bolts and blow them up. That’s how you got that bush to burn for Moses. Remember how much fun you had? This time instead of one bolt and a burning bush; send a thousand bolts and blow them from here to kingdom come.”        “Can’t,” God said. “They’ve got radar to trace the bolts and ABM missiles to intercept them.
     God paced and puffed deeply on his fatty Chong.
     Gabriel sat in God’s chair, leaned back and put his feet up on God’s desk. God kept pacing while Gabriel pumped the valves of his horn with one hand, and tried to get two little BB’s in the eyes of
the Cracker Jacks surprise toy clown with the other.
     God stopped in his tracks, snapped his fingers, and shouted, “I’ve got it!”
     Gabriel jumped and fell backwards over God’s chair jarring the BB from the right eye.
     “No, it’s too silly, ” God said.
     “What is?” Gabriel asked, picking up his horn and God’s chair.
     “I could blow them off the Earth with a gust of wind. “
     Gabriel snickered. “You’d make some sloop owners happy.”
    “But I don’t want to litter the cosmos,” God said.
    Suddenly an idea came to Gabriel faster than a Kardashian getting another follower.
     “Have an earthquake,” Gabriel said, licking the mouthpiece of his horn.
     “Can’t,” God said. “They’ve got buildings that sway with the quake. It wouldn’t destroy everything.”
     God and Gabriel scrupulously examined the blueprints of the Universe.
     “Nothing. Not one flaw.” God said.
     “You do good work, sir!”
     “There’s got to be a way,” Gabriel said grinding his teeth in dismayed anger.
     “I can’t see one,” God cleared his throat and spit.
     Gabriel was frustrated. From childhood it had been his dream to play for a large crowd. “What about starting a humongous war and let the people kill themselves?” Gabriel asked.
     “Maybe. I’ve thought of that one too, Gabe. I’ve been sending Godly visions of love to all those mindnumbed religious leaders around the world. I’ll tell you this, those knuckleheads sure do misinterpret my messages of love. It’s disgusting how they can be so exclusive, narrow-minded, self-righteous, and hateful. They have convinced millions of people to uphold values and prejudices that I just don’t condone. They even use my name to defend their principles. They keep saying The Bible is the word of me! Nit wits.”
      God grabbed his hair with both hands, pulled hard, and screamed a deep primal scream. Then coughed.
      “If they had any idea of what my messages of love are about they would be able to sit in the same room, have a beer or something, talk happily, constructively, positively; and, with just a litte effort be able to live in harmony. Where did I go wrong?”
      “Religion, what is it good for?” God sang like Edwin Star’s ‘War’ what is it good for? Absolutely nothing! God danced and as he sang then threw a Nerf ball into a little hoop over the waste basket. Swish. Of course.
     “Maybe someday some maniacal lunatic will lose his cool and push the button, but don’t hold your breath Gabe, belive it or not they’ve still got Henry Kissinger. And he won the Nobel Peace Prize! Jeezeus!”
     Gabriel had to vent his frustration. He clenched his fists and flattened God’s desk into the floor.
      “Yoicks,” God said, “Chill boy! Chill.” God passed the joint to Gabe.
     Gabriel took a hit and started to pant. He opened his mouth to scream but was so frustrated that only a high-pitched shrill was emitted through the space between his two front teeth. Gabriel attracted all the dogs in the neighborhood.
     “Get hold of yourself,” God said as he dished out some Alpo. Gabriel caught his breath and regained his composure. “Just between you and me, may I play something for you on my horn?”
     “Yeah, I guess so, ” God said. “It’s hopeless.”
     “What would you like to hear?”
     “How about a soft mellow rendition of Over the Rainbow?”

Ken Hurley

Sinners unite! In 1631, a tiny typo shook the religious world. In a reprint of the King James Bible by the famed, and later defamed, royal printers Robert Barker and Martin Lucas, the word “not” was shockingly omitted from the Exodus version of the Seventh Commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” was mistakenly printed as “Thou shalt commit adultery.” Oops, but oooh, the fun, said God. The typo appeared in about a thousand copies, which later came to be known as the “Wicked Bible” or “Sinners’ Bible” or “The Adulterer's Bible.” When the error was discovered, about a year after publication, Barker and Lucas were summoned to the Star Chamber to be adjudicated, fined £300 (equivalent to about $82,000 in 2024) and had their printing license revoked. All the King's Men proceeded to find and destroy as many copies of the Wicked Bible as possible, making it a rare collector’s item. Today, only about 15 copies remain. I know one copy is in the New York Public Library rare book collection.
      And, from the “Here We Go Again” file. Commandments in the classroom! Dateline June 19, 2024 BATON ROUGE — The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom from Religion Foundation announced that they will file suit to challenge a new Louisiana law that mandates Ten Commandments in each K-12 Louisiana public school classroom. Apparently, Louisiana hasn't learned from Kentucky. (All bourbon aside.) In Stone v. Graham, the U.S. Supreme Court on November 17, 1980, ruled (5 – 4) that a Kentucky statute requiring school officials to post a copy of the Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on a wall in every public school classroom violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which is commonly interpreted as separation of church and state. Looks like they can't actually post these Commandments on their side of the Wall Between Church and State, so they chose to legislate posting them on the walls of Louisiana's public schools. The Court found that the  Ten Commandments "had no secular legislative purpose" such as murder and stealing and was "plainly religious in nature" such as the worship of God and the observance of the Sabbath Day.
      Rhetorical question: How would the U.S. Supreme Court rule if the word “not” were deleted from each of the applicable Commandments, a la the Wicked Bible?
      Problem: We're in different times now. The Court's decision was narrowly divided in 1980. Today, we have a Court stacked with Christian Nationalists who are quite capable of ruling based on their religious biases and not precedent. 
      One more thing, the Court, at the end of its recent term, ruled in Donald J. Trump v. The United States, that presidents do have immunity from prosecution and cannot be criminally charged for "official acts.” How much immunity and to what extent is yet to be determined. This ruling allows presidents to engage in what otherwise might be criminal acts as long as they are considered “official acts” of the job — without criminal accountability. Hypothetically, even ordering assassinations. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that the determination of what may or may not be a presidential official act “... is best left to the lower courts …” We now have a dramatic expansion of executive authority. Or, in other words, the president who would be king. Our former president tried to overthrow our democracy with a violent insurrection. What might he do now (if elected) in the name of “official acts?” Not just him… future presidents too.
      As Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a scathing dissent, the ruling creates “nightmare scenarios” for what a president is now legally permitted to do. “Orders the Navy’s SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”
      However, how can it be an “official act” when a lame duck president conspires with his private attorneys to overturn the results of an election? More likely it is an act of a despotic narcissist, 
convicted fraudster, convicted felon, consummate liar, and twice-impeached former president who attempted to overthrow American democracy so he could cling to power. Hyperbole? Nah. Wicked.
:::::::::

Ken Hurley

Beyond the door
There's peace, I'm sure
And I know there'll be no more
Tears in heaven
Would you know my name
If I saw you in heaven?
Would you be the same
If I saw you in heaven? 

Those lyrics are from the Grammy-winning song, Tears in Heaven, written by Eric Clapton and Will Jennings in 1991 after Clapton's four-year-old son fell to his death from a 53rd floor window in Manhattan. Clapton grieved in solitude for a while, then began writing a musical score for the film Rush in which this song was included. The song is a powerful and emotional testimony to a religious belief regarding the concept of Heaven.
      It is regrettable, but there seems to be a timeless debate between science and religion. An endless source of contemplation, conflict, and some Cuckoo birdiness. 
     The pursuit of knowledge through empirical investigation is laudable and has yielded remarkable discoveries and technological advancements that have transformed the way we perceive and interact with the world. Our perceptions change with new information. Yay! At least, some humans are willing to accept new ideas, enjoy the process of contemplation, and are open to changing their mind.
      The earliest roots of science can be traced back to Egypt and Mesopotamia between 3000 and 1200 BCE. (Looks like Potamia was a mess.) The Babylonians get credit for recognizing geometric principles which would later confound high school students. Let's note, they were “Baby"lonians. Imagine what they might have discovered if they were “Allgrownup”lonians. 
     Other ancient humans interpreted the stars they could see at night. And by ancient, I mean old. This makes astronomy one of the oldest sciences.
       There is some evidence of religious behavior from the Middle Palaeolithic era (300-500 thousand years ago) and possibly earlier. No one is really sure. The earliest evidence of religious action is based on the ritual treatment of the dead. 
      The concepts of "science" and "religion" are relatively recent inventions: "religion," as we understand it today, emerged in the 17th century in the midst of colonization, and globalization, and as a consequence of the Protestant reformation. "Science" emerged in the 19th century in the midst of attempts to narrowly define those who studied nature.
     Thankfully, in 1583, Galileo was paying attention. He built a new and  improved telescope that enabled him to delight in star gazing and planetary observations. He also built a microscope suitable for examining bugs. Additionally, his empirical observations gave the world the knowledge that the period of a swinging lamp's sway is always the same, which is known as the law of isochronism of the pendulum or the law of harmonic motion.
      However, when Galileo described Copernican heliocentrism as a better way to think of the solar system by replacing Earth with the Sun as the center, he was met with strong opposition from Pope Urban VIII and investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was Cuckoo, ridiculous, blasphemous, and heretical, since it contradicted the Ptolemaic horoscopic system which was considered a religious truth for centuries. So, how much did Galileo have to pay for his attention? He was convicted and condemned by the church for being "vehemently suspect of heresy” and sentenced to house arrest for the remainder of his life.
      Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein, and many others credit Galileo with the birth of modern science.
      The idea that science and religion are at war with one another is actually fairly recent too. It likely arose in the last part of the nineteenth century, after the publication of On the Origin of Species or, more completely, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859). This work of scientific literature by Charles Darwin is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology.
      The effectiveness of science is evident in its ability to provide explanations for natural phenomena, develop life-saving medical treatments, and improve the quality of life for countless individuals. Lots of notable humans get credit for the development of the scientific method, including Aristotle, Issac Newton, the scapegoat Galileo, and Roger Bacon. Bacon gets credit for documenting the method with its emphasis on observation, experimentation, and peer review. He happened to be a Franciscan Friar too. The method has led to a deepening comprehension of the physical laws that govern our reality and has contributed to the evolution of human society.
      On the other hand, (right or left?) religion, with its series of beliefs, traditions, and so-called moral frameworks, offers a different form of effectiveness that amazingly still resonates with a significant portion of humanity. The power of religious faith to provide solace, so-called ethical guidelines, and a sense of purpose for some humans is evident in the diverse religious traditions that have shaped cultures and civilizations over millennia. The effectiveness of religion can be seen in the comfort, community, and fellowship it provides to individuals.
        However, I agree with Ricky Gervais when he said, take all the religious texts away for a thousand years and religious texts would not come back in the same form as originally published. But if you take all the science texts away for a thousand years, the science texts will come back as they are today because science is tested and proven. 
      In examining the effectiveness of science versus religion, it is important to recognize that both domains offer distinct ways of understanding and engaging with the world. While science provides empirical explanations and technological progress, religion offers spiritual fulfillment for many, and a sense of belonging to a larger cosmic narrative.
      Science has harnessed the power of electricity, developed life-saving vaccines, and demonstrated its efficacy in shaping the trajectory of human civilization and improving the welfare of individuals, including the religiously inclined.
      Conversely, the rituals, traditions, and communal practices associated with religious faith contribute to a sense of cohesion within some societies, and the preservation of a perception of cultural heritage, which may serve as a source of resilience and meaning in the face of existential questions.
      However, religious texts include nothing that is based on actual evidence, but lots based on conjecture and illogical circular thoughts passed down through the ages, originating with people who did not know where the Sun went at night and listened to a talking snake. Some examples: The Bible is the word of God. If that's true (which it is not) then God needs a good editor. The Bible instructs its reader as follows: 1 Timothy 2:12 “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.” And, Jeremiah 19:9 “I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another’s flesh because their enemies will press the siege so hard against them to destroy them.” And, 1 Peter 2:18-20 “Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the forward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? But if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.” The Bible teaches how one should treat your slaves! And, Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with a man, as with a woman: it is abomination.”
      How about a few verses from the Quran? Chapter and verse 2:191 “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.” 3:28 “Muslims must not take infidels as friends” 3:85 “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable” 5:33 "The penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth (to cause) corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land". 8:12 “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than Quran” 9:5 “But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way.” 9:123 “Make war on infidels living in your neighborhood.”
       How and why do humans still believe this dangerous, inhumane, cruel, hateful, and intolerant stuff as something considered to be guidance for a moral ethical life? While absolute nonviolence is not a requirement of many other religions, some religions so sharply restrict the use of violence, that nonviolence often becomes the only way to fulfill a life of truth, justice, and peace.  
       The blinding ideology behind many religions can be traced to the source of many wars. The deadly war weaponry however, is science. 
      Throughout history, the dynamic interplay between science and religion has given rise to moments of conflict and collaboration, inspiring introspection and debate on the nature of truth, meaning, and the human condition. The effectiveness of both domains lies not in their mutual exclusivity, but in their capacity to offer diverse perspectives and avenues for exploring the depths of existence.
      Religion does not have to be truthful to be effective. Religious leaders may spew their pulpit pabulum without fear or care if their words are put to test via the scientific method. A religious belief system based on borrowed imaginations will stifle the ability to grow introspectively, collectively, and authentically. Science does not have the luxury of being static. Science is constantly correcting itself through hypothesis, tests, peer review, and reasonable conclusions. 
      Let's remember, the Pope is supposedly infallible regarding matters of faith and moral direction. The notion of Papal infallibility was established by the First Vatican Council in 1870. Personally, give me science and reason over religious dogma and fanaticism any day.
::::::  

What do you read, my lord?” asked Polonius.  
      “Words. Words. Words.” replied a trifling, nonchalant, yet crafty Hamlet.
       “What is the matter, my lord?” asked Polonius.
        “Between who?” replied Hamlet.
        “I mean, the matter that you read, my lord.”

A brief scene from Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2 where Polonius makes another effort to talk with Hamlet. Hamlet makes his sarcastic reply suggesting the words he is reading are meaningless while also slyly showing contempt for Polonius’s constant blathering.
      “Words matter!” is often said in a condescending and derogatory tone accompanied by a vigorous finger wag by one grappling for intellectual superiority while oblivious to the short path they’re traveling toward demonstrating their own frustrating cognitive dissonance. Their hope is the recipient of the “words matter” admonition will hear the phrase as revelatory.
     Ahh, words! Of course. Yes. Yes! Words. Words. Words matter.
      As if we, the subject of the intellectual onslaught, are so mindnumbed that we cannot discern the difference between the words poison and candy.
     The late Rush Limbaugh gets some credit for popularizing the phrase “words matter” when he sat behind a golden microphone on his EIB Radio Network as he patronized and denigrated women, liberals, minorities and others with whom he disagreed. “El Rushbo” thought it necessary to let his listeners know that “words matter.”
    Barack Obama famously replied to Hillary Clinton’s view that Obama’s well-versed speeches essentially didn’t mean much without action. In another well-versed speech Obama said, “Don’t tell me words don’t matter. ‘I have a dream’ – just words? ‘We owe these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal’ – just words? ‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself’ – just words, just speeches?”
      Obviously, words do matter. Saying “words matter” is extraordinarily obvious. Moreover, to say “words matter” without specificity is laziness.
      The troublesome issue comes from people who bellow “words matter” as a smug and often abrupt end to an argument in which they have likely disabused their own “words matter” mantra. Some of these same people seem quite capable of finding an argument on any topic while twisting definitions to suit their position. To misquote an often paraphrased quote said by the Mexican bandit leader Gold Hat from the Treasure of Sierra Madre, “Definitions? We don’t need no stinkin’ definitions.”
      The expression “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me” is a half-truth. Words can hurt.
        I have a friend who had a common congenital facial deformity – protruding ears. When she was in elementary school, boys called her names like Spock, Dumbo, and monkey. These unkind remarks caused lots of tears and impacted her self-worth. She was energetic and athletic but felt it necessary to hide her ears with her hair or a hat. She no longer saw herself as beautiful but now as tainted, different, and ugly.   
     Even though she knew her self-worth did not come from her outward appearance, it was painfully difficult to forget the bullying and the name-calling.
     In college, she had surgery to pin her ears back. It helped her confidence but the memories and emotional scars linger.
    Now she is a happily married mother over 20 years living her best most creative life.
      There are too many derogatory racial epithets to share here with the further effort to show words can hurt. Here’s an excellent book that examines the history and controversy surrounding one of the more contemptuous slurs, Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word by Randall Kennedy.
       Let me offer some examples from the “words matter” lexicon of human verbal oddities of seemingly harmless yet aggressive or violent expressions spoken reflexively sans thought. 

Grab some coffee • Beat you to the punch • Beat a dead horse • Nail it down • Knife in the back • Dying of thirst • I’m starving • Brutally honest • Dying to meet you • Shoot you an email • Dog eat dog world • Push comes to shove • Roll with the punches • Kill time •  Pick your brain • Drop me off •  All tied up •  Have a crush •  Brainstorm •  Kill them with kindness • Jump the gun •  Gunned down the runner at third • Kill the ump •  Shoot the breeze •  Take a shot at it • Burned out • End of my rope • Bury the hatchet • You strike me as …

Here’s a mindnumbingly odd phrase spoken by people who want to preface what follows as a truthful statement but in effect puts veracity into question, “To be honest . . .”
      “To be honest” may be said before or after a statement to indicate the speaker is telling the truth about their opinions. To be honest, the undeniable implication is that the speaker hasn’t been honest other times. Honestly, “to be honest” is an unnecessary phrase unless the speaker honestly struggles with honesty.
     Here’s another figure of speech that generations of people use. When we work, we’re told to work hard. When we play, we’re told to play hard. “I work hard and I play hard!” These same people ask why is my life is so hard? Suppose instead of working hard or playing hard we worked and played joyfully and lovingly?
     Here’s another phrase spoken with little thought yet said by the hopeful that the recipient will back-off. “I’m busy!”
      Take note next time someone says, “I’m busy.” Because you’ll rarely if never hear, “I’m busy” from truly busy people. Truly busy people make time for you without saying, “I’m busy.” How? Because truly busy people know how to manage their precious time effectively without the whine, “I’m busy!” For so many, “I’m busy” is a simple and amazingly accepted excuse to avoid accountability, express disdain, boredom, or demonstrate priorities. (And you ain’t a priority.) “I’m busy” remains an unfortunate effective verbal mask.
     With all due respect, may we take a moment of scrutiny to look at the phrase, “With all due respect…” While intended as a polite way for the speaker to lessen the effect of the speaker’s cortisol-elevating grumbling complaints that follow the expression, the phrase has become so overly used it has reached cliché status. Time to develop a ‘respect meter’ so we can learn how much respect is actually due. With all due respect, of course.
      What might be different in our verbal exchanges if we taught ourselves to avoid the downward spiral into the powerful vortex of tired, thought-terminating clichés and resisted the path of least resistance in an effort to be original, inspiring, and thought-provoking with the words we choose?
     Suffice it to say: “Actions speak louder than words.” I had an attorney who said “Suffice it to say…” often. Problem was she never had anything to say after “Suffice it to say…”
     I also enjoyed the company of an Italian tour guide in Rome who began each sentence with, “Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera…”
    Instead of “Let’s grab a cup of coffee” suppose we said, “Let’s go sip a cup of coffee.”
     Whether you’re “dirt poor” or “filthy rich” –  either way you need a bath.
      If you’re going to bury the hatchet at least bury it where it will do the most good.
     And sometimes, words unspoken may leave gentle hearts broken.
     Anyway, it all boils down to pushing the envelope. Business is business. A deal’s a deal. It is what it is. No means no. Enough is enough. And, “never say never” means I just said never twice.
    The tree is matter. The sky is matter. You matter. You are matter. Words matter.
    Duh.

Please send thoughts in word form to Ken Hurley on the contact page.

Ken Hurley 

It is time to explore other solar systems. Spreading out may be the only thing that saves us from ourselves. I am convinced that humans need to leave Earth… To stay, risks being annihilated.  – Stephen Hawking

I was camping in Farragut State Park in Northern Idaho during the Apollo 11 moon landing on July 20, 1969. We set up a long makeshift aluminum antenna to capture radio reception to hear the live broadcast. It worked, but I had to pee so I left the camp and found a tree. On my walk back, I stumbled over a tree root, fell into our antenna and brought it down at T-30 seconds to lunar touchdown. Everybody in the camp screamed, “Oh, no!! NO!!!” We scurried to reposition the antenna. Radio reception was restored in time to hear Neil Armstrong say, “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed." And a bit later, his famous words, “That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.”
     I remain impressed that science and a desire to go where no one has gone before can bring humanity into something extraordinary. 
     Should we pursue extraterrestrial colonization? Yes. Sure. What else are we going to do? Pick up litter? We can do both.
    Humans have believed for centuries that there are gods who live in the heavens. Many humans still believe there is an invisible man who lives in the sky with a supernatural ability to address your needs when asked. 
     The notion of space travel and humans living in space can be dated to when Johannes Kepler invented the telescope in the 17th century. Johannes was thrilled with his invention and immediately dashed off an open letter to his old pal Galileo Galilei, which was published in the Conversation with the Star Messenger (1610) that read in part, “There will certainly be no lack of human pioneers when we have mastered the art of flight. … Let us create vessels and sails adjusted to the heavenly ether, and there will be plenty of people unafraid of the empty wastes. In the meantime, we shall prepare, for the brave sky-travelers, maps of the celestial bodies. …  I shall do it for the moon, you Galileo, for Jupiter.”
      The Other World: Comical History of the States and Empires of the Moon by Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac (1657) is credited by Arthur C. Clark as being the first science fiction book in which a rocket to the moon is yearned for by humans. Jules Verne did his part to encourage sci-fi space lore when he published From Earth to the Moon (1865), which inspired Georges Méliès to make the film, A Trip to the Moon (1902). Then in 1903, the Wright Brothers, working in their bicycle shop, made an airplane that actually flew. 
      Dreams of intergalactic space settlements were all the rage in the 1950s after Walt Disney produced Man and the Moon. Let's also remember Ray Bradbury’s, The Martian Chronicles (1950). The song, Fly Me to the Moon, was written in 1954 but became associated with NASA and the Apollo missions in 1964 after Frank Sinatra and Count Basie recorded the great Quincy Jones arrangement. Then Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke presented us with apes who marveled at the monolith in 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), inspired by Clarke’s 1951 short story, The Sentinel.
      In 1962 at Rice University in Houston, Texas, President John Kennedy delivered his famous speech about space exploration, which in part said, "But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas? We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.” 
      Satellites launched by NASA have provided critical data on climate change, natural disasters, and other environmental phenomena, which help us to better protect and preserve our planet. NASA's Earth science missions have shed light on the interconnectedness of the Earth's systems, demonstrating the fragility of our planet and the need for sustainable practices to ensure its future viability. NASA has also inspired generations of people to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The Space Camp for young students, and the Women@NASA initiative to promote diversity in STEM fields, have encouraged people from all backgrounds to pursue careers in science and engineering. Nurturing the next generation of scientists and engineers is critical to ensure that the legacy of its space program will continue to inspire future generations to push the boundaries of human knowledge and exploration.
     Humans settling other orbs has captured the imagination of scientists, entrepreneurs, writers, and dreamers. With rapid advancements in space exploration technology and growing concerns about the sustainability of life on Earth, the push for interplanetary colonization has regained momentum.
       One of the most compelling arguments for colonizing other planets is the need to ensure the survival of the human race. Why? Fair question. It is human instinct to want to live. 
      Earth is vulnerable to a variety of potential threats, from natural disasters like asteroids and supervolcanoes to human-induced catastrophes such as climate change and nuclear war. By establishing colonies on other planets, we can create a Plan[et] B for humanity, ensuring that our species will continue to survive and thrive even in the face of global calamities on Earth.
      Colonization of other planets could open up new opportunities for scientific discovery and exploration. In addition to advancing our knowledge of the cosmos, interplanetary colonization could also lead to the development of new technologies and industries that could benefit both space exploration and life on Earth. 
      The challenges of living in the harsh environments of other planets would require us to innovate and adapt, leading to breakthroughs in areas such as sustainable energy production, advanced robotics, resource management, architectural design, alternative fuel production, 3D printing, and low-gravity manufacturing, to name several. These technologies could then be applied on Earth, helping us address pressing issues like climate change and resource depletion. 
      Suppose we could find a planet that has gravity, water, and an atmosphere similar to Earth? Certainly not Mars. Mars is totally inhospitable to life as we know it. 
Take a peek at Planet K2-18b, first discovered in 2015. Suppose K2-18b had the right stuff that could alleviate the harsh difficulties we find on other planets? The difficulty with planet K2-18b is getting there. It's 124 light years away. 
      As we establish colonies on other worlds, we would create new markets and industries, driving innovation, creating jobs, stimulating a burgeoning space economy. This could help to offset the economic challenges facing our planet and create a more resilient and interconnected global society fostering international cooperation and collaboration. The challenges of sending humans to live on other planets would require the combined efforts of nations around the world, bringing together people from diverse cultures and backgrounds to work towards a common goal. By working together on such a monumental task, we could bridge political divides, promote cultural exchange, and build bonds of friendship that transcend national boundaries.
      The exploration and colonization of other planets could also inspire future generations and ignite a sense of wonder and curiosity about the universe. Perhaps similar to the early exploration of the “New World,” which sparked a spirit of adventure, desperation, and discovery. 
      Despite the many potential benefits of colonizing other planets, there are also enormous challenges and ethical concerns, which include exploitation, sovereignty, environmental considerations, resource depletion, ecosystem disruption, and cost. The cost of sending humans to colonize other planets is astronomical. Not as simple as Ralph Kramden's often repeated line, “Bang, zoom, you're going to the moon, Alice!” Space colonization requires substantial investments in technology, infrastructure, research, and political will. Additionally, the long distances involved in interplanetary travel would pose serious health risks to astronauts, including exposure to cosmic radiation and the physiological effects of extended spaceflight. A bit different from life on Earth, space is always trying to kill you. But, what about propagation in space? That's an experiment waiting to happen. Any volunteers?
      The idea of colonizing other planets raises other important questions about our responsibility first on Earth and second to the space environment. We do not want to trash space as we've done to our streets and oceans. However, we should not lump all humans as if they are all careless, selfish litterbugs. Many work to pick up the trash others leave behind. So, we need to develop a Space Waste Truck to reclaim all the mess we've left in orbit.
      We do have international Treaties already in place that are intended to safeguard human efforts in space. The United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) has several main tenets which over 100 nations have signed onto. Known as The Outer Space Treaty, or, more specifically, “Treaty  on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies.” The treaty is the foundation of international space law for signatory nations. The treaty presents principles for space exploration and operation including:  1) Space activities are for the benefit of all nations, and any country is free to explore orbit and beyond.  2) There is no claim for sovereignty in space; no nation can “own” space, the Moon, or any other body.  3) Weapons of mass destruction are forbidden in orbit and beyond, and the Moon, the planets, and other celestial bodies can only be used for peaceful purposes.  4) Any astronaut from any nation is an “envoy of mankind,” and signatory states must provide all possible help to astronauts when needed, including emergency landing in a foreign country or at sea.  5) Signatory states are each responsible for their space activities, including private commercial endeavors, and must provide authorization and continuing supervision.  6) Nations are responsible for damage caused by their space objects and must avoid contaminating space and celestial bodies.
      The treaties also have authority over the billionaire “billionauts” private corporations – Elon, Richard, and Jeff. Are there others?
      Despite the many formidable and daunting challenges, the potential benefits of pursuing interplanetary colonization  outweigh the risks and difficulties.  
      By expanding our presence beyond Earth, or as Stephen Hawking said, “spreading out,” we can help ensure the survival of our species, advance our knowledge of the universe, stimulate technological innovation, foster international cooperation, and maybe even inspire future generations to go where no one has gone before.
      Space sex, anyone?

::::::::

Oh dearest me. How I pine fondly for the days of yesteryear when polemical, vitriolic, diatribes were offered with wit, charm, a sweet dash of sorghum, and a tad of sarcasm. The days when a mindful and clever response to such an affront would be seen by the upper class and the classless, the educated and the illiterate, the Kings and the jesters as a delightful touché.
      My sole gentle soul yearns for the days when a curmudgeonly recipient of such mental sharpness would recognize the tongue in one’s cheek. The days when insults and dubious expressions were presented with a considered array of fan and flury yet would not end a worthy exchange of human verbal dribble. The days when dexterous lingual surprises were met with suitable intellectual ability and emotional stability to maintain tasteful human connections.
     I have been around longer than forever. Sweary acronyms and initialisms have been around a long while too. However, I’ve learned when it comes to humans — it is often just another SNAFU¹.
     Some of my memorable summers were spent in Strafford and London to assist the prolific Jacobean writer, the Bard of Avon, the great William Shakespeare (anagram for “I am a weakish speller”), where he penned hundreds of brilliant, witty barbs often repeated with joyful jolly by those who heard them. Here’s a small sample of my favorites:

“Thou art a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy worsted-stocking knave; a lily-liver’d, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing, superserviceable, finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd in way of good service, and art nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pandar, and the son and heir of a mongrel bitch.” (King Lear, Act 2, Scene 2)

“Thou art a boil, a plague sore, an embossed carbuncle in my corrupted blood.” (King Lear, Act 2, Scene 4)

“If you spend word for word with me, I shall make your wit bankrupt.” (Two Gentlemen of Verona, Act 2, Scene 4)

“Your brain is as dry as the remainder biscuit after voyage. (As You Like It, Act 2, Scene 7)

“You are as a candle, the better burnt out.” (Henry IV Part 2, Act 1, Scene 2)

These “21st Century” humans seem giddy when they accelerate an unfortunate degradation of effective human communication evident by the charge some humans believe “bad letters” stifle the overbearing, pedant, sneering recipient of “bad letters”. This lamentable conundrum remains a self-imposed human obstacle to collaborative progress.
      Are you familiar with the expression, “There are no bad words only bad letters”? If not, wait for it. Soon to be the howling rage amongst the fragile, timid, and indignant humans who would quit a conversation because “bad letters” were used rather than stay on point to seek reconciliation.
      WTF² Humans‽‽
      I remain astonished. WTAF³ is wrong with the GD⁴ MF⁵ humans? And by “human” I mean the English-speaking kind. Mostly the overly sensitve, ineffectual, pseudointellectual Americans who get tongue tied trying to put a meaningful sentence together on a visit to the laundermat while they salivate for another opportunity to display self-righteous indignation. The type of human who claims they’re “woke” but can’t take a joke. The easily frightened human who believe their time on Earth is horribly unpleasant because things do not go their way. The type of human who fights to change the world but not themselves. The zombified somnambulists who see injustices everywhere even though foggy eyes. You know, the sample of humans in America the Canter Poll⁶ says are increasing in number faster than the population of Gwagwalada.
      Even I (the one, the only, God of Imagination) cannot fathom how the popular Roman letters A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Z and sometimes Y are deemed offensive by the unenlightened.
      It is clear some humans still do not know what WTF references. Other humans understand what WTF references and are grateful for using only the letters. There are other humans who don’t understand why the letters WTF need to be used instead of the actual words. There are other humans who are offended by the letters and their usage.
      So, my dearest and lovely Mistakes, letters that replace English words deemed offensive by some humans are now offensive too? OMFG⁷? Get over yourselves for God’s sake. WTF is a harmless expression. The thoughts and messages accompanying the letterful expression are what matter.
      Remember the Wisconsin Tourism Federation? These folks thought their initials WTF were not suitable for tourism. I disagreed. I told them it could be turned into a marketing coup! Since humans rarely heed my suggestions the folks at the Wisconsin Tourism Federation changed their name to the Tourism Federation of Wisconsin. Quite cheesy, I’d say.
      I once hoped for a common-sense approach to the English language that  included entertainingly, witty use of grammar, syntax, spelling, phraseology, character, subject, and tone; without opposing petulance by juvenile self-appointed judges of effective communicative standards who seek the punitive for the speaker. My hope for levity within invectives amongst the humans is greatly diminished by the sense and insensibilities of the few. Typically FUBAR⁸.
      Well, WTF is one of my favorite American human expressions. Right up there with Jesus H. Christ and Holy S(***)⁹. Dubs TEEEE eff! Nothing Romeo would say, I’m sure.
      I am aware the letters used are matters of personal preference. I am not fond of the C-letter or the N-letter. But, WTF remains a favorite of mine! If only the low-key and high-strung would accept Earth is a small place where the shanannagins are usually not about you.
     I’m not encouraging a careless disregard for situational decency nor do I wish to minimize the significance of eloquent civil discourse. But when the recipient terminates a dialog because WTF or other renowned initialisms showed their serifs, the problem is with the recipient not the speaker.
     To communicate, one must be able to speak with an ability understand the topic and stay on topic. Effective communication seeks reconciliation. One can not effectively communicate when one must tip-toe around the ultrasensitive because they feel another offense coming their way they prefer did not exist.
      WTF should not be an impediment to dialog. To those who champion the disuse of “bad letters” may I offer an oberservation going back as far as the beginning of human fancy? Please remove your heads from your blind spots, loosen up, and let life pass through you. Still, it remains your choice when to meet the challenges of life as a brick wall, a gentle filter, or neither. 
     The rapidity by which humans are devolving into their prideful “Cancel Culture” will eventually yield the cancellation of humans themselves!
     I used to spit tabacky. Can’t do that anymore. Why? It’s disgusting!
     Oh dearest me. Too many humans have yet to cross the longest yard — the slave prison of their own mind.
     There are oodles of people who believe they are good yet suffer a deep “Woe is me” misery because they have good intentions but dopey actions.
      Huffy puffy indignation is a feeling born from a troubled mind regarding unfair treatment, blameworthy attributions, and a violation of percieved social norms. One purpose of indignation is to help aghast humans feel good about themselves. It provides the toe-tapping, hands on hip, nose in the air folks an imaginary lofty perch from where their sense of moral superiority may rest. It is facinating to watch how something as simple as a few spicy letters can create an intense emotional state of mind which leads to unpleasnt reactive indignation. To wallow with indignation over preferable reconciliation is a crooked path toward the declination of humans willfully serving humans. There is no trophy for those who suffer most.
     However, there is an abundance of affrontation within the human creation that beg for human service. “Bad letters” is not one of them.
     I am hopeful more humans will enbrace acceptance, understanding, celebration, camaraderie, trust, and a desire to be of service to the rest. Always remember, you fail when you quit. Rumors suggest some actually learn from this.
     Your one precious life. What will you do with your one precious life? Will calmness, forbearance, and patience triumph over annoying, acrimonious, aggrevation? Will indignation, anger, and a troubled mind give way to kindness, understanding, and love? The time is now to recognize joyful gratitude that is yours as you pass through life. Especially, if you are one of those kind and effortful souls reading another of my silly little rants. Anyway, it is up to the humans to decide how much exasperating indignation you wish to endure.
     I’ll end this wary numenesque rant with another quote from one of my preferred humans, you know, the great Bard himself, “For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” – Hamlet: Act II, scene 2.
     FWIWTFGN¹⁰.

Struggling with BLII, “Bad Letter” Induced Indignation? Call: 1 (800) 555- WTAF (9823)

NOTES:
1. Situation Normal All Fucked Up
2. What The Fuck
3. What The Actual Fuck
4. God Damn
5. Mother Fucking
6. Predates Gallup
7. Oh My Fucking God
8. Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition
9. Censored
10. For What It’s Worth Time For God’s Nap

Got rants? Please direct them to this human: Ken Hurley at Kenhurley88@gmail.com

###

The Christian Nationalists are a real threat to American democracy. Led by a convicted fraudster, convicted felon, known liar, and twice-impeached former president who desperately wants a return stay in the White House as a dictator with complete immunity. It would be unbelievable if this were fiction. But it is true.
Number 45 evokes similarities with the multi-headed serpent, Hydra. There are so many people who thought 45 would be finished by now. Hercules thought he could remove the deadly serpent with one swipe of his sword. But with each slice that removed one ugly head, two heads grew back. In 2024, we thought today’s version of the serpent would be long gone by now. We are amazed as to why the modern day Hydra remains in the public eye. Our last great hope to dispatch the menacing serpent remains with our votes. Vote accordingly. Please, vote while conscious.
Number 45 was indicted in Florida on felony charges for mishandling top secret documents at Mar-a-Lago. He was indicted in Washington D.C. on felony charges for plotting to overturn the 2020 election as a leader of the MAGA morons at the start, middle, and end of the deadly, riotous insurrection in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. In New York, on May 30, 2024, a jury found Trump guilty of falsifying 34 invoices and Trump Organization general ledger entries to hide a $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign to avoid allegations of extramarital sexual encounters in an effort to illegally influence the 2016 election. He was indicted in Georgia on felony charges for violating the state’s anti-racketeering law by scheming to illegally overturn his 2020 election loss. Yet, the Christian Nationalists embrace this man as if he is a MAGA messiah.
Christian nationalism is a selfish, misguided ideology that claims America was founded as a Christian nation. That America should be a Christian nation today. That America should be a Christian nation in the future. They want to obliterate all notions of separation between Church and State. That notion is historically inaccurate and theologically blasphemous. Make no mistake, though, their threat is real, as evidenced by those who stormed the U.S. Capitol, killing police officers while carrying crosses and signs that read “Jesus Saves.” Then there are the U.S. Supreme Court’s religiously-biased, ultra-conservative majority, our Speaker of the House, and too many members of Congress. Let’s also remember the Christian Nationalist billionaires who fund and work toward dismantling our public education system in another effort to thwart democracy. These people extol the Bible as the literal word of God. They worship power. They want more power.
Humanists and Freethinkers reject the claim that the Bible is the word of God; we’re convinced the book contains many errors and dangerous teachings, having been written and rewritten over a long cruel period of time by ignorant, unenlightened, superstitious, and fearful men. Not one woman is credited with contributing her free thoughts to the “good book.”
Let’s note that the Bible does not mention abortion or gay marriage, but it does go on and on about forgiving debt, liberating the poor, and healing the sick. Like student debt forgiveness, universal healthcare, and an assurance that each person would be clothed, fed, and housed.
America was clearly founded as a secular nation. The United States Constitution is clearly secular. America is a blended society inhabited by people, cultures, lifestyles, and religions from around the world. To claim America is a Christian nation is at best willful ignorance, or at worst a blathering, blatant, manipulative, harmful lie that seeks to treat as insignificant, or worse, remove from society, all those who do not share Christian beliefs.
Would you like some motivation? Shortly before Easter, 45 entered into a new business arrangement where he is likely collecting royalties from sales of the Bible. Watch here: https://youtu.be/noezEB6BKno?feature=shared

Please vote to rid ourselves of the serpent.