Marc Perkel Rantz

Monorealism vs. Polyrealism

People often ask me what it is that's different about the Church of Reality. The answer is, we are dedicated to real reality, the one true reality. What reality is the one true reality? It's the real reality, the reality that really is real. It is the some total of everything that actually exists. No reality but reality.

In contrast, most other religions are polyrealistic. They believe in multiple realities. Realities that can only be experienced by emotions generated by the imagination. They are taught to turn their back on what they call the "material world" which is associated with being evil and believing instead in the "spiritual world" and other worlds of the imagination.

But there is only one true reality and that reality is the sum of everything that actually is real. Polyrealism is a cheat. It like saying that there are other realities that aren't part of reality and because they are part of a "different reality" you can't prove they don't exists because they are untestable. They call this "faith" but in that context it's really a call to reject reality. To accept faith is to turn your back on the real world and put your imagination ahead of existence. To be a Realist is to turn your back on your imagination and put reality first. And that's what makes the Church of Reality different from all other religions.

I've made some new videos that I uploaded to You Tube and Google Video. As usual they are crudely produced. Just me and my web cam but I think they get the point across.

The Faith Paradox
Monorealism
And - my rant on global warming and population control.

More are coming.

Monotheism vs. Monorealism

Working on some new terminology. Monorealism is the belief in one reality. That all things that are real are part of reality and that anything that isn't part of reality is not real. In contrast monotheists and polytheists tend to believe in "other realities" which are "outside" of the world of science and are experienced through emotions generated by the imagination. Our "world" includes "everything that is real" and excludes everything that is not real. We may not know what is and isn't real but our position is that whether or not we know it's status, that everything that is real is real and everything that is not real is not real. There are no other states where something is real in "another world" or in a "different reality". Our definition of reality would include all other realities that are actually real.

Monorealism also accepts the Sacred Principle of Scrutiny in that we apply the principles of science to determining what is and isn't real. We might believe something is true that we can't prove because we don't know everything. But if we believe in something it's because we have a reason to believe it's real. it's because we have some evidence, or a theory based on logic, or some mathematical model where at least the math works (string theory).

Monorealism excludes faith in that everything we believe in is subject to scrutiny. We have accepted that if we are proven wrong that we will change our minds. Faith excludes scrutiny and if you accept something based on faith then you are expected to continue to believe it no matter what.

Realists experience the world through understanding. We rely on logic, reason, wisdom, and scrutiny as the foundation of our beliefs. In contrast beliefs that require emotions and the imagination are not considered to be reliable.

We are monorealists who believe in monorealism because of our monorealistic point of view. Who likes this idea?

I also want to throw out another term I call "The Faith Paradox". Two people from two different religions are in a room who both believe different things that are mutually exclusive. That can not both be right, but they can both be wrong. both have accepted their position based on faith which can't be questioned. You are a realist listening to the claims of these two people. How do you determine who is correct?

For example, many Christians claim that you can only get to Heaven through Jesus. Muslims claim that you can only get to Heaven through Mohamed. Since both used the word "only" they are mutually exclusive. Since both want to convert me them how do I determine which one will get me to Heaven, if there even is Heaven?

The question really is - which one is real? How do we determine that using faith. Do we wait for the deity to speak to our heart (ie. use our emotions and imagination)? But both of these people did that can came to conflicting conclusions. One or both perhaps were influenced by Satan. But since each religion has a billion people then at least a billion of them failed to get accurate information using faith as a tool to determine reality. As an outside observer I would have to conclude that if I made my decision based on faith that there is at least a 50% chance that I will be wrong.

So - how does one determine the truth between two conflicting world views based on faith? Perhaps both people could pray to their deities and then have a contest with swords and the one who is victorious is the one with the stronger deity? But they've been running that test for centuries and the results are inconclusive. So what is left? The only way they can really determine who is correct is to turn to reality.

If one can prove scientifically that they are right then they win. But anything proven scientifically is part of the real world, the physical universe that does not require faith. So if people who have conflicting faiths want to determine what is real then they have to come home to reality.

So - let's just skip the faith crap and start with reality? Ultimately they have to come to us bacause reality isn't something that you can ignore forever. Reality doesn't go away when you stop believing in it. Faith is like kicking a rock and imagining that you are punishing the rock when you are only hurting your own foot. It's not about what you believe in, it's about what's real. Ultimately is about the one reality that we all share. That's why I'm a monorealist.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality
"We believe in the one true reality!"

Tony Perkins and Bush Ploy to stack the Supreme Court

Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council has been plotting with Bush as to how to rig the Supreme Court and bypass the Democratic Controlled Senate? How is he going to do it? That's a mystery. By if you listen to this audio clip you'll hear Tony Perkins talking about that he is in contact with the Whitehouse and has talked to Bush and that he is concerned about the Democrats in the Senate blocking him. But, Tont goes on to say, "The is a way around that", that they are looking into and that it's going to be a "major major fight". Seek to 24 minutes in to the clip.

Additionally the FRC is dumping their exclusive relationship with Republicans. They are currently "praying about it.", waiting for God to give then the go ahead to get in bed with the Dems.

So - the question is - what's the trick. I want to know what he means by "a way around that". What is that all about? Is there a Christuan Coop in the works to take the Supreme Court by deceptions and trickery? What are evangelicals plotting this time?

God by definition can not be proven by science

Follow this logic:

God is by definition supernatural.
To be supernatural you must be outside of the natural world.
Supernatural and Natural are mutually exclusive.
Anything that can be scientifically proven is part of the natural world.
Therefore anything supernatural can not be scientifically proven.
Therefore God can not be scientifically proven.
Therefore any scientific proof that God is supernatural must by definition fail.
Since God by definition must be supernatural to exist, then the existence of God can not be proved by science.
If God were proved by science then it would be part of the natural world and therefore not God.

BTW - this is a trap to get believers to think about reality. We in the Church of Reality believe that the more you use logic the more you will reprogram your brain to think about reality. Thinking undermines faith. If you think about this it might cause you to question what you believe. You are hereby warned not to risk your immortal soul by thinking about this. God prefers people who don't think over people who do because people who don't think have an easier time of believing without questioning than people who do think.

Atheist Church Challenges Theists on Morality of Torture

The Church of Reality today has issued an edict challenging other religions to speak out against the Bush administration plan to legalize torture in the United States. The Church of Reality is a church based on believing in everything that is real and does not recognize the existence of any deities. In this edict the Church of Reality claims to have a superior moral position to that of God believing religions such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam stating that it is the only religion that takes a strong position against torture as part of their official doctrine.

"We are Atheists", claims Marc Perkel, founder of the Church of Reality. "Yet we have developed a stronger and more sophisticated set of moral values than religions that are supposedly inspired by omnipotent deities. If these deities actually exist then why can't they keep up with the Atheists? We in the Church of Reality clearly understand that legalizing torture is clearly wrong and we are willing to take a strong position against it. The Theists however seem to be confused and unclear about if torture is right or wrong. We in the Church of Reality are challenging believers to pray about it to see if their God is as wise as we mortal Realists are."

Perkel admits that part of the reason his edict is so provocative is to inspire debate within the theistic world and get them inspired to take a position against Bush's plan to legalize secret torture camps in foreign countries who allow torture. "We in the Church of Reality are strongly against this and we are trying to get the attention of our fellow religions to get on board with this issue.", says Perkel. "We want them to share in the glory of doing good things for the human race."

In the edict the Church of Reality vows to remember the lessons learned from the concentration camps set up by the Nazis in Germany during World War II and sees Bush's torture camps as a dangerous first step in that direction. "This looks like the Holocaust to me", says Perkel who was raised Jewish. "Judaism never impressed me much. But I do remember seeing people with numbers tattooed on their forearms from being Hitler's prisoners. What amazes me is why the Jews aren't ahead of me on this."

Here is a link to the new edict challenging religions to decree torture to be imoral.
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/edicts_of_doctrine/

Here is a previous edict denouncing the legalization of torture by the United States:
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/current_event_edicts/

Please feel free to contact me. I will debate any religious leader live on this issue. I ask everyone to spread this challenge to every place you can. Please post this everywhere. We can not afford for America to become the next Nazi Germany.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

The Jewish State Experiment is a Failure

What to do about the future of Israel is anyone's guess but the establishment of the Jewish state was a mistake. However, I'm not advocating the overthrow of Israel because the Islamic states around it are even worse, but barely worse. The problem is that in any nation when you create a system where members of one religion has superior rights over those of other religions it is a situation that leads to war.

Case in point - Israel. Even with one of the most advanced cultures on the planet, and having been persecuted and slaughtered themselves, in less that 60 years it is clear that the Jewish state has learned nothing and Israel has more of a desire for war than it has for peace.

Israel treats all non Jews like they are vermin. The rest of us are subhuman and our lives don't count. When you look at the way Israel treats it's neighbors and the non Jews within it's borders it is clear to me that they have formed a mentality that they thing they really are God's chosen people. Since God is fictional they are at best the chosen people of their own fictional deity. As the founder of the Church of Reality I can claim that we are the chosen people of the Flying Spaghetti Monster but that claim is as fictional as Israel's claim.

Jews in other countries are more humble and socially adjusted and they are normal productive members of society. They respect other people and they don't take themselves seriously the way Israeli's take themselves.

When I listen to what the country of Israel is saying they have no regrets about the number of Lebanese they kill and these other people are in the way of Israel's goals. Israel complains about kidnapping of it's people but when they kidnap 1/3 of the Palestinian Parlament they call them "detainees". Like Islamic terrorists Israel has its own death squads that hunts down and kills people who don't support their agenda, including their own leaders like Yitzhak Rabin.

The problem isn't with Judaism itself as much as it is with the idea of having a society with a superior class and an inferior class. It creates the illusion that they are actually better people and it create an imbalance that tends to lead to war as the oppressed rise up against the oppressors.

For a culture that is over 5000 years old you would think that after being both oppressed and oppressor that the Jews would get it. However - they don't.

What is the solution? I don't know. But the solution has to be a government in the region where all people have an equal standing. The state of Israel as a Jewish homeland where Jews hold superior status must end. This is true of Islamic states and Christian states as well.

Now I have to figure out who's going to kill me first for this opinion. Will it be Jewish, Islamic, or Christian death squads?

Why is Mel Gibson a big deal?

Mel Gibson was drunk and he said some things - so what? People says stupid things when they are drunk. No sane person should take the words of a drunk seriously. So what if he said that the "The fucking Jews were responsible for all the wars in the world." I'm more offended with his drunk driving than what he said while drunk. I think they should give him 4 weekends in jail and pull his drivers license for a year.

Church of Reality Denounces Israeli Attack on lebanon

PRESS RELEASE:
Contact: Marc Perkel - marc@perkel.com
Date: 07-19-2006
Title: Church of Reality denounces Israeli Invasion of Lebanon

Marc Perkel - founder of the Church of Reality has today issued and edict condemning the Israeli invasion. "Israel has gone insane." say Marc Perkel who was raised Jewish and now stand is shock at what he is witnessing in Lebanon. "This invasion is absolutely unjustified - it is wrong. Israel destroyed the sovereign nation of Lebanon, a newly formed western style democracy who would be the kind of nation that would have been Israel's friend. Israel destroyed their roads, their airports, their ports, their power plants, and indiscriminately bombing civilian cities killing hundreds of innocent people far from the southern border. Lebanon is not Hezbollah and Hezbollah is not Lebanon. Israel is destroying the wrong enemy. Israel is destroying its own standing in the world community"

"This is unproductive in that by launching an unjust war Israel has empowered its enemies showing that Israelis are terrorists too. Israel can not win the peace by mass slaughtering innocent people and destroying a neighboring nation in an unprovoked attack. Israel has given Islamic terrorists a new tool for recruiting assassins to kill not only Israelis, but citizens from the rest of the civilized world. Israel has put world peace at risk and this attack is an attack against civilization itself."

The Church of Reality asserts that Israel is not above international law and it should have gone to the United Nations first to get a consensus of the world community and acted along with other nations in a coordinated and well thought our response. "To start a war over the kidnapping of two people is just plain wrong. You don't kill hundreds to save two. That's crazy!"

Details of the Church of Reality's position can be found here.

http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/current_event_edicts/

My God vs. Your God - Atheist Challenges Believers to Put Up or Shut Up

Letter to the Editor

Now that Israel and Lebanon are in yet another religious war it makes me wonder how do we resolve the "my God is stronger than your God" wars. All I see is Jews, Muslims, and Christians all fighting over who God gave property to. Maybe it's time to put it to the test. Let us have a contest to resolve the issue once and for all as to what God's will is.

We will pick a specific day and on that day every religious person in the world will pray at the same time for a miracle that will happen in a specific place at a specific time to get God to reveal who owns the holy lands. God will then create a miracle to indicate the winner who would then get the holy land for all time. If God doesn't show up however then the holy land would go to the Atheists. So that would give God some incentive to show up, unless God wants the Atheists to win.

As an Atheist I'd be willing to accept the challenge because I have "faith" that we would win. So I say to believers, do you have enough faith to accept this challenge? If not - why not? Let's put the decision in God's hands and put an end to religious wars in the Middle East.

PS. If we Realists win then we'll rename Israel to Is-real.

Lioness in zoo kills man who invoked God

KIEV (Reuters) - A man shouting that God would keep him safe was mauled to death by a lioness in Kiev zoo after he crept into the animal's enclosure, a zoo official said on Monday.

"The man shouted 'God will save me, if he exists', lowered himself by a rope into the enclosure, took his shoes off and went up to the lions," the official said.

"A lioness went straight for him, knocked him down and severed his carotid artery."

The incident, Sunday evening when the zoo was packed with visitors, was the first of its kind at the attraction. Lions and tigers are kept in an "animal island" protected by thick concrete blocks.

The Gospel of Reality

Sometimes it's easy to get discouraged in the face of illusion but there's one thing to always remember. Reality is here to stay. Reality isn't going away. Reality always was and always will be. Reality was there at the beginning of time and will be there till the end of time. And no matter how many people believe in things that aren't true reality stays the same.

It is always there and you can always turn to the real world, embrace the truth, and we as a society can make better choices. Reality can change your life today. You can embrace it, explore it, own it. Thinking about reality is the joy of being real in the sacred moment. You can become one with the real world. Let reality into your soul and experience the knowledge that everything in the world is real.

Reality gives us strength. it gives us courage. Reality gives us the true freedom to make the most out of who we are and what we will become. We owe our very existence to reality. If we reject reality, we have nothing left.

We are surrounded by all this wonderful knowledge. Knowledge that we can grow, that we can share, that we can build our future with. We can use reality to build a better tomorrow, a world that we can be proud of and we come together as one people, as one planet, to live in peace and let reality take humanity to its full potential. We have the power to choose our destiny. To decide what we will become. Let us therefore make the best choice possible and let reality guide our decisions in everything we do. We can become the dream.

This is the Gospel of Reality. Go forth and proclaim it!

Zogby Reinstates Realist as a Religious Choice

I just filled out one of the Zogby online surveys and they have Atheist/Realist/Humanist back in the list of choices. I just wanted you all to know that and give John Zogby some good energy for including us in his survey again. As you know there's a lot of pressure out the by evangelicals to exclude reality based religion from everything they can so it takes a little courage to stand up to that. Cheers to John Zogby.

Kissing Hanks Ass - Religion Parady Video

You'll love This Video. Kissing Hanks Ass.

Zogby excludes Realists from Survey

Dear Church of Reality Members,

A few months ago I asked you to email Zogby polling to ask them to add Atheist/Realist/Humanist as a chouce of religion in their polls. They did for about two surveys. But I just got the latest survey and the Atheist/Realist/Humanist choice have been removed. So at 77% completed I stopped filling out the survey. The way I see it, if our religion isn't included then I'm not going to participate in their polls. Zogby has moved towards anti-realism in that the only religions the recognize are theists religions.

I am not going to participate in Zogby polls anymore and I'm sending him a copy of this email to let him know that. I don't understand why we are no longer worth counting, but if we aren't worth counting then our opinions aren't worth anything either and I'm not going to help any organization who only counts Theists religions.

I encourage you to write them and tell them how you feel about this.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality requests IRS Exemption for Privacy

Dear news organization,

I - marc Perkel - Founder of the Church of Reality send the following email to the membership of the church asking them to write the IRS to ask for a religious exemption to not allow our tax returns to be sold to marketers. The Church cited the Religious Freedom Restoration Act anking that its Sacred Principle of Privacy be respected. Here is the letter:

Dear Church of Reality Members,

I just read an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer about an IRS plan to allow the accounting firms that do your tax returns to sell them to marketing firms. Just when you think nothing more can shock you, they take it to a new level. Here's the article, you read the story.

Thanks to dvorak.org for the link.
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/14147002.htm

Disclosure of personal information such as one's tax forms is in direct violation of the Sacred Principle of Privacy and undermines the concept that we own ourselves and that our tax information is not to be marketed. Our information is something that it ours and I think I speak for everyone when I say that none of us want marketers calling our home phones while looking at our tax returns trying to scam us.

Last month the US Supreme Court upheld the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which allowed a religion to use a Schedule 1 drug in a religious ceremony. The case is /Gonzales v. O Centro. /The decision upheld that the federal government cannot impose a "substantial burden" on an individual's or group's free exercise of religion unless the burden: "(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest."

I am declaring by edict that the marketing of our Sacred Principle of Privacy and that such disclosure imposes a substantial burden on our free exercise of our religious beliefs. Such a ruling violates use to the core of our being. We also contend that the government has no compelling interest in allowing accountants to market our personal information to scammers. So, in light of the RFRA we demand an exemption for members of the Church of Reality to prohibit anyone from disclosing any of our members information to anyone.

So - here's what I want you all to do if you can find a little time. I want as many people as possible to write a letter to the IRS stating that you are a Realist and that you want them to make a ruling exempting Realists from any regulation that involved tax return disclosure. I don't know how many letters it will take but the more the better.

The other think I need done is that this message should be posted in as many places on the web as possible. I want it to reach new people who didn't realize that they were already Realists and that they are entitled to privacy.

Who does this apply to? Who is a Realist? What does it take to be a member of the Church of Reality? Well, you may already be a Realist if you accept the axiom of our religion. Do you believe in reality? are you willing to make a religious commitment to believing in reality the way it really is? Is reality important in your life? Is it so important that you often tell your friends that they should take reality into consideration when making their important life decisions? If you answered Yes to these questions then you are a Realist and welcome to the real world! You are now entitled to assert the Sacred Principle of Privacy and tell the IRS that you support the exemption.

To write the IRS send a snail mail to this address:

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-137243-02)
Room 5203
Internal Revenue Service, Box 7604
Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044

Write the letter in your own words, but feel free to use anything in this email or from the article it links to. One of you might come up with a better letter than me and these letters shouldn't be just copies of the same thing. The reason I think this will work is that the folks at the IRS probably don't want to do it either and need a good reason to say they can't. This letter gives them that good reason. This idea is so stupid that it can only come from one place.

And - spread it around the web. I think there are a lot of Realists out there who want their privact protected.

This has a good chance of making a difference. Your email worked last time with Zogby. I noticed on the last survey I get that it included Atheist/Realist/Humanist as one of the choices. We are now at least worthy of being counted.

In other news, I have significantly expanded the "Why we are Different" section.
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/different/

And - added some new fun vocabulary, Futurism vs. Dogmatism!
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/terminology/terminology/dogmatist.html

Made significant progress on the Self Ownership section:
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/self_ownership/

So - feedback appreciated as always.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

San Bruno California
866-666-3211
marc@perkel.com
03/21/2006

Church of Reality is a Religion of Courage

Dear Church of Reality Members,

I have been giving a lot of thought to issues regarding when to speak out against something and when to be silent and I believe that the Church of Reality is a religion that must speak out even if there are risks involved in speaking out. It's interesting that when you write a set of sacred principles that it is in those principles that the answer lies.

The Church of Reality is a religion about reality and if we are afraid to speak the truth when speaking the truth is necessary then what are we? We are nothing. We would be Realists in name only. I believe that true wisdom comes from courage and that since we have a Sacred Principle of Courage that we can not afford the luxury of keeping our mouth's shut while extreme fundamentalism takes control of the world.

I found an interesting web site on Islam that nails it. The scary part is that what they say there is true and one only need to look at the pictures to see that there are states of human deevolution that are worse that extinction. We absolutely must never let a religion like this be allowed to control the world through terrorism. Islam is not a religion of peace and love and one need mot look any farther than their prophet to understand why. What you do is what you believe and all I see from the Muslim world is hate, violence, murder, torture, and they must never be allowed to win.

I was raised Jewish, barely, but one of the things I remember as a child was seeing people with numbers tattooed on their forearm from Hitler's concentration camps, and that is something that stuck with me. We are living in a world where that could happen again unless we Realists commit ourselves to ensuring that we will make sure it doesn't. I'm not prepared to count on the Jews to do that job considering their own problems with violence. And if I don't mention Christians here it's not that I haven't forgot them. They too have lost their minds and are a threat to the future of the human race. We as Realists can not allow either one of them to start world war 3 and wipe out our futures.

Back to Muslims. I found this web site and it moves me.

Faith freedom

Especially this song called Islam is not for me:

I personally am strongly moved over issues of the oppression of women. We live in a world where women are taught to be slaves to their Islamic and Christian husbands. The Prophet Mohamed is a child rapist. He married a 6 year old girl, but waited till she was 9 before he "consummated the marriage". I don't care who you are or what time or culture you live in, sex with a 9 year old girl is just plain wrong. It absolutely can not be justified under and conditions that I can think of. but because their holy prophet did it it sets an example that is still being followed today. 9 year old girls are still being raped. Women are still being stoned to death and hanged. Men are being tortured and murdered and over what? That we draw cartoons about the molester? And we are supposed to allow that because of sensitivity to their culture and religious beliefs? I don't think so!

Yes it is true that Muslims have been abused by other cultures. They have been tortured and killed and are angry about it. But as Sam Harris pointed out, Buddhists have also been tortured and killed, but they aren't going around expressing their hatred by the mass slaughter of innocent people. So there is a difference between Buddhism and Islam and Buddhism is clearly superior when it comes to matter of peace. Something that we should learn from ourselves.

I have decided that for myself that I am going to speak out clearly and without fear about the injustices of the world, even if it gets me in trouble. I believe that fear is a luxury that I can not afford and that I am actually serious about our principles and our missions and that we have a duty to transform the world into the proverbial "Garden of Eden" and that I believe that it is achievable.

One think to remember. They are not afraid to call us non-believers infidels and to declare that we deserve death and that we are intrinsically evil, have no value, and that we are going to be punished by burning forever in Hell to pay for the sin of having a wrong opinion abut the existence of the invisible cloud being. So I'm not strongly motivated to respect their religious sensitivities and offend them by suggestion that stoning a woman to death for a chastity violation is barbaric.

I haven't determined how I'm going to proceed but I have decided that the Church of Reality should represent a position of strength and wisdom and that I am not going to let the fear that some crazy Muslim is going to kill me someday because of my cultural insensitivity.

Anyhow - I just felt motivated to say that and if it sounds like megalomania - we'll no one's perfect.

Let us dream the dream of a better tomorrow, and make it happen.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality Challenges other Religions on War

PRESS RELEASE:
Contact: Marc Perkel - marc@perkel.com
Release Date: 03-10-2006

Church of Reality Challenges other Religions on Morality

The Church of Reality today issues a challenge to other religions on the issue of ethics and morality. We live in a world where the hatred among religions grows daily between Christianity and Islam and the time has come to put a stop to it. Both sides claiming the superior moral position and to represent the word of God while taking up arms and going to war with no concern for the costs to civilization and the future of the human race. Both religions claim divine inspiration from the same source but as an outside observer we do not see it. We believe that what you do represents what you believe and if you are dishonest and you are violent then that is what you are and that is what you believe.

Both religions claim to be a religion of peace yet neither side has not the will nor the divine inspiration to make peace happen. If your religions truly have divine inspiration and guidance then one can only conclude that your gods are failures. On the other hand if your gods actually do represent love and peace then your religions do disservice to your creator.

It is logical therefore t assume that the superior religion would be the one who wins based upon the nature of the gods that you believe in. Therefore our challenge is, show us your God through you and show you are the true voice of the master by winning through peace and not by war. According to your own holy books when you turn to war over peace and when you put hate before love you are violating the very core principles that you claim that God stands for. Therefore you can not win a religious war by doing the opposite of what you claim God wants you to do.

We in the Church of Reality are Atheists. We look at your behavior and we conclude that if a God does exist that you are not in touch with it. We are committed to believing in whatever is real. We would believe in God if God were real. Your religions claim that you have a personal relationship with God and that you communicate with God directly and that God transforms you into something that reflects its nature. So we say, show us the fruits of that transformation. We ask you if your God is powerful enough to erase the hatred from your heart and to bring peace through each of you and to stop the violence. If your God is so weak that his followers can't stop killing, then you aren't going to convert and Realists to your religions.

We in the Church of Reality also believe, "By their fruits you shall know them." So if you are filled with the spirit of the Lord then lets see if you can shine the light of God's peace and love and end the wars.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality demands religious exception to South Dakota Abortion Ban Law

PRESS RELEASE:

TITLE: Church of Reality demands religious exception to South Dakota Abortion Ban Law
DATE: 03-03-2006
CONTACT: Marc Perkel - marc@perkel.com

Does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act protect the Church of Reality from South Dakota's abortion ban?

The Church of Reality has today issued an edict declaring that South Dakota's ban on abortions violates the rights of it's members to practice their religion and calls upon the state to provide an exception to the law for members of the Church of Reality to be able to get abortions, and to provide immunity from prosecution to health care professionals who would provide abortions to church members.

The Church of Reality has taken a strong pro choice position when it comes to abortion declaring that a woman has an absolute right to choose not to reproduce if they don't want to. "This abortion ban is in direct conflict with several of our Sacred Principles.", declares Marc Perkel, the First One of the Church of Reality. "Our religious freedom is at stake here."

On February 21st the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling upholding the Religious Freedom Restoration Act allowing a religion to use a prohibited drug Hoasca, a hallucinogen containing DMT, a Schedule 1 drug prohibited by federal law under the Controlled Substances Act. This ruling declared that religious freedom take president over law in cases what the law creates a "substantial burden" on a "sincerely held religious belief". Under the RFRA the government has to demonstrate a "compelling government interest" in order to overcome the substantial burden test. This ruling opened the door to allow the Church of Reality to challenge the State of South Dakota on the basis that this law is unconstitutional as applied to members of the Church of Reality and health care workers who would provide abortion services to church members.

"We are starting the process today by putting South Dakota on notice and asking for them to voluntarily cooperate with us to provide our membership with a religious exemption to this law. If they fail to comply, we will see them in court."

The edict can be found at:
http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/current_event_edicts/

====================

South Dakota Aborting Law Infringes on Religious Freedom of Realists

Edict Date: 03-03-2006

The decision of the State of South Dakota to ban all abortions puts a substantial burden on the sincerely held beliefs of the Church of Reality which believes that a woman has an absolute right to and early term abortion without any outside restrictions. The right of a woman to control her own reproduction is vital to the advancement of society which is necessary to advance the cause of exploring reality the way it reality is.

This law violates several of the Sacred Principles including but not limited to, the Principle of Freedom, Principle of Privacy, Principle of Positive Evolution, Principle of Inclusiveness, Principle of Compassion, Principle of Environmentalism, Personal Responsibility and the Principle of Wisdom. We can not grow as a society where the government can command our women to bear children against their will. We are a fiercely independent and individualistic religion that places great sanctity on the value of personal choice which includes one of the most personal of all decisions, the decision of bearing children.

We reject the patriarchal view of other religions that the male dominated ruling sex should be allowed to decide to compel women to bear children against their will. We believe that one's status in society is not enhanced or diminished by their sex. Women and men are equal in the church of Reality.

We in the Church of Reality recognize that overpopulation of the planet is a serious threat to the integrity of human civilization and that overpopulation is worsened when women are compelled to bear children against their will.

We reject the notion that pregnancy is God's way of punishing teenage girls for chastity violations.

We believe that a person has the right to control their own lives and make their own choices even if those choices are considered to be clearly wrong choices. One has the right to live the life they choose to live and to enjoy and suffer the consequences of their decisions. We hold these personal decisions to be private and not a matter that requires any justification or explanation to society.

We take the position that a person begins their existence and has the rights of a human being at live birth. We reject that personhood and personal rights begin at conception. We in fact recognize that the two cells that make up a person are alive before conception and that conception is one of many steps necessary to produce a person and has no more significance that any other necessary step.

In particular, the South Dakota law prohibits all abortions even in cases of rape or incest. Therefore if a father rapes his daughter and impregnates her, she is forced to bear his child under the law. We in the Church of Reality finds this to be repulsive. Not only is the rape victim who would seek and abortion criminalized, but the doctor who provided the abortion would be criminalized as well.

Pursuant to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and consistent with the Supreme Court decision upholding the right to religious freedom, I Marc Perkel, as the highest authority of Church of Reality law do hereby declare and decree by edict the following:

1. That the Church of Reality finds that the South Dakota Abortion Ban is repulsive, unethical, and immoral.

2. That it infringes upon our freedom of religion under the First Amendment and places a substantial burden on our sincerely held religious belief in the right of women to choose to have abortions.

3. That the law criminalizes abortion providers from providing abortions services cutting off our female member's ability to legally obtain an abortion.

4. That it is our position that the State of South Dakota has no compelling government interest in prohibiting abortions and therefore the rights of Realists to get Abortions in South Dakota take precedent over South Dakota law.

We therefore demand that the State of South Dakota make provisions in their law enforcement system to allow members of the Church of Reality to legally obtain abortions and to provide doctors and other health care professionals immunity from prosecution for providing abortion services to Realists.

New Church of Reality Interviews Posted

I've been working on the web site again and found a few more interview that I had done that I haven't yet posted. So I finally got around to editing them and uploading them and there are two new interviews that you probably haven't heard before. In particular the Cup of Joe interview is both interesting and entertaining. Probably you could learn more about me than you want to know.

Here's the link. That's 5 interviews on it now and if you don't want to read the site you can just listen and get an idea about what the CoR is all about.

Here's The link.

If you like what you hear then try to see if you can get me on more interviews. We need more exposure and I love doing these interviews and it's a good way to get the Sacred Message out there. Get people talking about reality and thinking about reality.

Church of Reality Speaks Out against Muslim Violence

Unlike some religions the Church of Reality isn't afraid of a little humor. We aren't afraid of someone being critical of what we believe in. We don't turn violent over mere words or symbols. This cartoon was chosen because it is offensive. I didn't pick this one because I liked it but because I didn't like it. It represent how many religions really view Realists and what they think is going to happen to us in the after life.

Muslim violence is fundamentally wrong. I say to Muslims, what is your religion about? Realists believe that you are what you do. What you do reflects what you really believe in. We do not care what you say you are about or what your holy books say. We do not care about the history of your religion. What matters to us is what you do in this life in the here and now. I see violence, burning, anger, murder. That is what you are doing and it's all over some stupid cartoons. It is what you do who defines what you are and after seeing the cartoons I have to say that the behavior of the Muslim world shows the cartoonist had a point. Islam's public face is violent. Your faith is weaker than your anger.

Those of you who claim that Islam is about love and peace I say, show it to me. I say take control of Islam or split off and form your own religion. Show us by your behavior who you are.

The Church of Reality expects no loyalty from it's members that would override good judgement. If we do not do what the name of our religion symbolizes then members are to leave this religion and form a new church that really is dedicated to the pursuit of reality the way it really is. We are a religion that is based on the {ln:Principle of Wisdom} which does not allow us to let anger rule what we do. We do not let ourselves be controlled by the words of others. We contain our emotions and think things through. If someone draws a cartoon about us then we look at that to see if there is something to be learned that we are overlooking. Maybe the Muslim world should look at the cartoons and try to understand why Mohammed is depicted with a bomb on his head. From what I see from the way Muslims are behaving the cartoon makes sense to me.

What you do reflects what you believe in. If you are violent then what you believe in is violence.

The Church of Reality challenges Islam to show wisdom. We challenge you to show the world who you are and what you stand for. We challenge you to show us that you can stop the violence and live in a world as productive members of society. We want to know that you aren't going to go out and start killing people every time someone pisses you off. From what I can tell your behavior is an insult to your God. You look at the news and you tell me, is this what God wants you to do? Is this an example of the way people of God behave? Do you want to stand before God and explain that you represented God in this manner and face his judgement? I would think not.

The civilized world is watching Islam. We are asking ourselves if we want to share community with you. We are asking ourselves if you are safe to be around or are you going to slit our throats while we sleep. We Realist believe in freedom of religion. But that freedom stops when we feel that a group threatens civilization. What we see in the news is worrisome.

Muslim Violence will not stop Free Speech

Letter to the Editor

If Muslims think they are going to stop free speech through violence they will soon see that it's not going to work. As it turns out some of the cartoons are accurate. Islam is a violent religion that is focused on world domination and oppression. The can claim that they are a religion of peace and love but what you do speaks louder than what you claim to be. Muslims stone women to death for being raped. They behead people for speaking freely. They leave a trail of death and destruction that reflects what they really believe. This latest campaign of violence is not winning over the hearts and minds of of people who love peace and freedom and it doesn't make us want to have Muslims as part of our community.

Islam is a dangerous psyco religion

Reaction to Muslinm cartoon by Islam shows that the point of the cartoonsis actually true. Muslims are dangerous crazy people who advocate violence and are quite comfortable to murder and destruction. The expect us to give up our rights to talk about them the way they want. No fucking way.

Christians are crazy people too by they don't turn violent every time someone draw a cartoon about Jesus. Of course they want to rule the world and hope to be as crazy as Muslims, they just don't have as much faith.

Jews - somewhat more crazy in some ways than Christians. Tell some Jews that they aren't God's chosen people and they get offended. Tell them they are acting like Nazi's in Palistine and they go ape shit.

So is say to the Muslim world - fuck you - we say what we want. get used to it.

Church of Reality adopts UN Declaration of Human Rights

The Church of Reality has accepted the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights as part of it's religious doctrine. The declarations are very compatibles with the Sacred Principles and are a natural extention of the Kernel, which is the Church of Reality doctrine. Here's the link to the Church of Reality version.

Wikipedia deletes Church of Reality Again

The web site Wikipedia has again deleted the Church of Reality from it's listings. The do the same thing with most Atheist based articles. Only after a monumental affort will they post Atheist related stuff. The did the same thing with the movie, The God who Wasn't There.

In this case according to their discussion they insist the the Church of Reality has only one member and that's why it's being deleted. Here's the link for those who want to weigh in on the subject.

Wikipedia has now shut down the discussion to undelete the Church of Reality. Apparently when the votes don't go their way they stop the voting.

I saved the deleted discossion:

==== [[Church of Reality]] ====
* {{On AFD|Church of Reality}}
* {{On AFD|Church of reality}}

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I would like the Church of Reality undeleted. It was originally deleted because it wasn't notable because it had only 3000 Google hits and it wasn't a 501(C)3 non profit. It now has 24,900 Google hits and is now an [http:// _tax_exempt_status/ IRS blessed 501(C)3 church]. So the reason it was deleted is no longer valid.--[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 02:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

* The reason that I gave in the original AFD discussion is as valid now as it was then. Nothing has changed to affect the status of this subject as mis-use of Wikipedia as a soapbox by its author. Marc Perkel has continued his self-promotion campaign and the number of Google Web results has as a consequence increased, but there is still no evidence that this religion has any more than 1 adherent. '''Keep deleted'''. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 02:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
** The Church of Reality [http://www.churchofreality.org/phpbb/ PhpBB discussion board] shows 360 users and 1415 articles. That's just the number of Church of Reality members who participate in discussions. Church of Reality [http://www.churchofreality.org/wusage/monthly/2005/10/01/index.htm Usage Statistics] shows 91,000 page views for the month of October. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 02:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
***And yet, no evidence of any but the 1 adherent. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 03:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
***And yet an alexa ranking of 384,137. [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|^(talk)]] 02:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
***Could you let us know when Mike Malloy covered this, so I can look at his archives to see what he had to say about it? [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|^(talk)]] 02:45, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
****From Marc Perkel's blog: [http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000660.html Perkel to be Interviewed on Air America Radio], [http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000667.html Two Radio Interviews I did receintly], [http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000664.html Marc Perkel on Mike Malloy's Show on Air America Radio]. [[User:Geronimooo|Geronimooo]] 15:54, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
** If it has extensive coverage, it doesn't matter ''why'' the author wrote the article. I'm not arguing either way yet (waiting to see if people think this new info would change the outcome of an AfD), I'm just saying. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 02:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*** The Church of Reality ''hasn't'' had extensive coverage. Marc Perkel has created an extensive self-publicity campaign. (In the original AFD discussion I listed several of the web sites that he operates.) But ''all'' of the information about this religion comes from a single source, Perkel himself, and thus suffers from the original research, non-neutrality, and verifiability problems that such [[Wikipedia:autobiography|autobiography]] does. Even the coverage by Mike Malloy was ''information sourced directly from Perkel himself''. No reliable sources independent of him had produced works of their own about it then, and Perkel has presented no evidence that any reliable sources independent of him have produced works of their own about it since. Perkel has continued his self-publicity campaign, of which it seems apparent that repeatedly submitting this same article to Wikipedia is a part, but this continues to be original research, a novel belief that has not been peer reviewed and accepted into the corpus of human knowledge, for the same reason now as it was then.

Contrast the situation here with religions that are ''not'' original research. You'll find plenty of published works from multiple sources, that are independent of the subject, that deal with [[Christianity]], [[Islam]], [[Scientology]], and the like. (See the references sections of those articles, for starters.) There is ''nothing'' like that for Perkel's church of 1 adherent.

Keeping out novel concepts that have not gained any traction in the world outside of their creators (and the Wikipedia articles written by their creators) is part of the reason that we have a [[Wikipedia:no original research|no original research]] policy. That a proponent is vociferous, and creates a huge self-publicity campaign, does not change that. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 03:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep deleted'''. '''''333''''' unique hits out of those thousands cited, and no references in Google news or Google Book search. Also only 42 hits when searching Google groups. This made-up church is as nn now as it was at the time of the vote. [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|^(talk)]] 02:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep deleted''' as per Zoe. Another misguided attempt to use Wikipedia as a launching pad. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TheMidnighters]] 02:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Abstain''', but as the admin who deleted it the 2nd time, I figured I should at least explain my actions. I saw the 2nd listing on AFD, compared the new version to the old/deleted version, and observed that they were substantially the same. To be sure, the new one is longer, but in my opinion, they were on essentially the same topic, so I speedied the new version under [[WP:CSD]] G4. I am, shall we say, agnostic on the issue of whether it should be undeleted or not. --[[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] 02:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep deleted''' per Uncle G and Zoe. [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - Starblind 03:03, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
* '''Overturn and Keep''' I have full faith in the Church of Reality (the irony!) --[[User:BenE|BenE]] 03:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
** Neither your faith nor having made your first edit here ({{tl|welcome}} and congratulations) change the issue at hand, which is whether there's new information that warrants a reconsideration of the article's notability. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 03:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
***Well at least you can't say there are no adherents. This is a religion with international reach, (I'm canadian) Oh and thanks for the welcome! --[[User:BenE|BenE]] 04:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
****The welcome was just a way of pointing out that I’m a meatpuppet wasn’t it? Shame on you for using sarcasm on a newbie!--[[User:BenE|BenE]] 04:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
***** Honestly, I was [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]] and welcoming you as a possible productive editor. I'll admit I was also pointing out you're new, so that whoever ends up counting viewpoints to determine consensus can take it into account at the end of the discussion. We really do love new editors, but they tend not to be well-versed in deletion policy. So I'm willing to call it partial sarcasm. ;) -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 04:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
****** I'm well versed in your deletion policy. It's simple. If is isn't Christian then it gets deleted. I am totally unimpressed with the censorship here. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 06:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*******That's pretty ridiculous, you're not the only atheist editor here, maybe you should go take a look at [[Atheism]], [[history of atheism]], [[Criticism of Religion]] and many more similar articles. If you want to be taken seriously you should drop the whole persecution and censorship act since it's completely groundless and juvenile. Noone has said your articles should be deleted on the grounds of religious outlook, it's the fact that there are only 348 unique google hits and you have yet to prove notability. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TheMidnighters]] 06:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Chuckle'''. I like this quote from the [http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/irs_tax_exempt_status/ IRS blessed 501(C)3 church] web page, ''One [IRS] agent even commented that he thought it was one of the most interesting applications he's reviewed.'' --[[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] 03:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
**You'd do well to look at the source of that information. How do we ''know'' that the IRS agent said that? Who is telling us? [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 04:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*** So you think I made up 360 users in the BBS discussion and then faked 91,000 hits to generate stats pages? And I faked the Mike Malloy interview, and the IRS tax letter ... --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 04:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
* '''undelete''': Real enough. [[User:Ombudsman|Ombudsman]] 04:10, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Might want to consider these FACTS.''' Usage Stats on [http://www.churchofreality.org/wusage/monthly/2005/10/01/index.htm CoR website]. The [http://www.churchofreality.org/phpbb/ Discussion Board] Shows 360 members with 1400+ articles that are involved in discussions. Here's the [http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/irs_tax_exempt_status/ IRS Papers]. Here is a recording of the [http://www.churchofreality.org/ads/malloy.mp3 Air America Interview with Mike Malloy]. So - is this a one person religion? I don't think so! --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 03:54, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
**All of those URLs are for [http://www.churchofreality.org/ http://www.churchofreality.org/]. Information from a web site (one of several) that you own and run, and thus whose content you have control over, does not qualify to be verifiable fact. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 04:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*** Yes, but the radio interview is presumably real, isn't it? Likewise the amount of readership the website has matters. The question is only whether the new information is compelling enough to warrant a new AfD. -- [[User:SCZenz|SCZenz]] 04:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*"undelete": **This certainly isn't a parody religion (unlike the flying spaghetti monster)... it is actually very well thought out, I found it quite compelling. I understand that that doesn't mean that it has gotten "traction" on the Web, etc... but Marc has been interviewed on the radio, has IRS tax free status, and was cited by BoingBoing. I think that it's worth an entry! {{unsigned|151.198.26.199|04:23, 28 November 2005}}
*'''Keep''' as far as numbers are concerned, I am also a member. The Church of Reality is a serious undertaking and should remain. {{unsigned|63.203.231.61}}

* Church of Reality [http://www.churchofreality.org/ads/prince-hives.mp3 Radio Spot]. Pretty sophisticated for a religion with only one member. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 04:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Endorse and keep deleted'''. Looks like a valid AFD to me. It's a vanity article with hardly any credible outside sourcing (and the proverbial fifteen minutes of fame just don't cut it). [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_>|<]] 09:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*Here's another outside link...not sure if that makes any diffefrence, but I wouldn't just dismiss it as only having one adherent: http://blog4mike.blogspot.com/2005/11/welcome-to-reality.html[[User:Mar10029|Mar10029]] 14:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
:*On the other hand, I would dismiss [[User:Mar10029|Mar10029]] as being a sockpuppet who has only ever made three edits, all to this discussion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mar10029]. --[[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] 15:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*I guess by sockpuppet you mean that you think that I am Marc Perkel, trying to rig the discussion. I am new to Wikipedia, but I really like the COR philosophy, and heard about this discussion on the COR message board, so here I am, to show my support.
I realize that the fact that I "like the philosophy" is irrelevant to this discussion, but that is why I'm here. I haven't posted before because I don't regularly spend time here. Perhaps that makes my opinions less useful in this forum, I do understand that, and I appreciate the fact that you regular posters put a lot of work into Wikipedia. But I'm not a sock puppet. Sorry to intrude.[[User:Mar10029|Mar10029]] 15:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Endorse close, keep deleted.''' Valid AfD with strong consensus to delete. Google Web hit counts as evidence of increased notability is unconvincing, as it is well known that souch counts can be artificially manipulated by "search engine optimization" by anyone interested in self promotion. In contrast, but Google Groups (USENET) shows [http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&num=100&q=%22church+of+reality%22&safe=active&qt_s=Search only 35 hits], Google Books shows [http://books.google.com/books?q=%22church+of+reality%22&btnG=Search+Books&hl=en no hits at all], and an online search of the last five years of the New York Times up through November 28, 2005 returns "Sorry. There are no articles that contain all the keywords you entered." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] [[User_talk:dpbsmith|(talk)]] 15:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Endorse close, keep deleted.''' For all the above-mentioned reasons. [[User:Nandesuka|Nandesuka]] 15:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
* '''Endorse''' deletion. No new evidence presented to justify overturning the prior decision. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] [[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]] 15:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Restore'''- I am a member of the Church, and feel it certainly has as much merit to an article as the [[Church of Virus]] --[[User:Mcsporran|Mcsporran]] 15:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Restore''' - Not only am I a member of the Church, I feel that it presents a uniquely articulated viewpoint.
*'''keep deleted''' valid VFD, no demonstration of notability. — [[user:Duncharris|Dunc]]|[[User talk:duncharris|☺]] 15:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''restore/keep''' I must admit that I find it annoying that Marc Perkel calls the deletion censorship. However, '''The Church of Reality does have members (I'm a member of the mailinglist) and I'm not a sockpuppet'''. [[User:Geronimooo|Geronimooo]] 16:05, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*I agree with Geronmooo... there really are two separate issues here - validity of the COR, and the Internet/MSM "profile" of the COR. Clearly the latter predominates in this discussion. But it also probably not "censorship", as in active repression of an unpopular viewpoint. I would like the administrators to consider, though, that while I do understand their need to keep Wikipedia reasonably lean and free of self promoting pages, one of the nice things about an online encyclopedia is the ability to more easily include articles on interesting but not widely know topics. This might be a useful exception to the standard numerical rules[[User:Mar10029|Mar10029]] 16:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep deleted''' - I had actually heard about this web-site and visited it previously. My impression was that it is set up like a religion, but in 'Reality' is currently something more like a message board / social club for atheists. However, they still fall short on notability. There are plenty of web-sites with larger user groups and higher traffic which we don't include. I suspect that some of these accounts which are labelled 'sock puppets' are instead actually participants in the message boards there coming to Wikipedia for the sole purpose of voting on this issue. --[[User:CBDunkerson|CBD]] ^{[[User talk:CBDunkerson|T]]} _{[[Special:Contributions/CBDunkerson|C]]} ^{[[Special:Emailuser/CBDunkerson|@]]} 16:34, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

*'''Keep and Rewrite''' - I'm a fan of the COR and on the mailing list. I think the reasons of deletion are valid. However i would very much like to see an article about the COR on Wikipedia. Perhaps if a 3rd party wear to write the initial article and it could be edited from there. Sorry Marc but i just don't see this as religious censorship. [[User:Zath42|Zath42]] 17:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

*'''More Votes to Overturn and Undelete'''

These people posted in the wrong place. They posted these comments on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fastfission but they are clearly meant to support the restoration of the Church of Reality site. As you can see, they are new to Wikipedia, but their votes still count.--[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 17:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Here's what I moved:
----

'''CoR'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I hear that the Church of Reality was a] deleted and that b] there's only one member. Considering the Church of Reality has federal tax exempt status and I am also a member, I don't think it's appropriate to delete the entry.

Nicole M. Wolverton
nicole.wolverton@gmail.com

'''Church of Reality'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Please consider allowing the Church of Reality to maintain a page in Wikipedia. There are many of us who consider this an important organization. The fact that we have been granted 501(C)(3) status should show that the organization is real. Thank you.

'''Church of Reality'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I am a member of the Church of Reality. To call it a "vanity religion" only reflects the prejudice of the Wikipedia gang. Read C of R documents to see that it is a useful, sane, reality-based organization, a novel concept in religion. This is not a fraud, but it was Mark Perkel's idea. Please keep it in Wikipedia.
Gordon Clark

'''I'm friend'''

I am here too :-)

'''No one is Vandalizing your Talk Page'''

As you have stated. If I am the sole member of the Church of Reality as you claim then I can't have followers. You're link is out there and the church of Reality explorers don't like it when people like you are lying about the number of members of the church of Reality. Maybe it's time that you admit that you are wrong. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 15:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

The reason so many people are posting here about the Church of Reality is because of an e-mail on the CoR mailinglist.

"[Fastfission thinks there's only one CoR memeber.] Here is his Talk page. Please let him know that the CoR has more than one member. Click on Edit next to the church of Reality section at the bottom of the page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fastfission"

so I doubt it's Marc Perkel using a proxy and spamming. [[User:Geronimooo|Geronimooo]] 16:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

'''User:Fastfission removed my talk on talkpage'''

User:Fastfission removed my talk (and others) on his talkpage. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFastfission&diff=29492013&oldid=29491913] [[User:Geronimooo|Geronimooo]] 16:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

prejudice of the Wikipedia gang....

* Yep - he removed a lot of material from his talk page. Looks like he's not following the rules but he took it upon himself to delete the Church of Reality claiming it has only one member so this is what happens. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 16:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

** Here's what he deleted

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I certainly doesn't matter what this hairball thinks of our church. Reality is what it is and will win against superstition and bigotry in the end. One doesn't even need "faith." (Pardon my dirty mouth.) One doesn't have to believe in reality. Reality will not be swayed by the doubts of unbelievers.

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Sirs,
I am a member of the Church of Reality. I do not know Mr. Perkel personally, but I am aware of your concerns that his desire to put an article on your site is merely an attempt at self-promotion. I do not believe this is the case. The church is a real (albeit small, relatively new and technically a charity) organization of those like myself, who feel that the injection of mythical deities into an otherwise rational debate of very pressing issues greatly hinders the ability of our collective effort to achieve practical solutions.

Before I became aware of the recent controversy of the posting, I was surprised when I found that your site did not have an article on the church. I had a mind to write one myself when the time became available to me. But, obviously, Mr. Perkel’s article would be more comprehensive (and definitely better written) than any I could write.
Thus, with the utmost respect and appreciation for the work you do, and with the understanding that you must be vigilant of those who would use your wonderful resource as a platform for personal gain, I would like to convey my belief that Mr. Perkel’s motives are benefic and the cause just.
Please reconsider the deletion.

Thank you,
Frank D.
nthsign69@yahoo.com

'''Devout Member of the Church of Reality'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I am a recent convert to the Church of Reality. I believe it deserves to have an entry on Wikipedia if for no other reason than it represents a response to the prevalence of supernatural and religious beliefs in modern society.

'''Church of Reality '''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I am proud to say that I, too, am a devout member of the Church of Reality, so I believe that you will have to retract your statment that our church has only one member.
By the way, the usual disclaimers apply: I do not personally know Mark Perkel nor am I being paid by the church, nor have I accepted any reward or other perquisites for this statement.
I just want you to know that we church members are serious about our membership and about our church, and I believe that you are perilously close to the application of a religious "litmus test". I believe you know that this would be the first step on the road to religious persecution of other sects with whom you disagree.
Is that really what you want?

'''Church of Reality vs. Flying Spaghetti Monster'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' You have a nice site for the Flying spaghetti monster, and you won't have one for Church of Reality?

Take a look at CoR expanding membership and body of work, you should agree that it's much more developerd than the FSM. CoR deserves it's own entry in the Wiki.

thanks.

'''Church of Reality.. '''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Hey, there more of us than just Marc..! Seriously, read the site.. pretty well thought out and insightful. Certainly more useful as a life philosophy than the pastafarians over at the FSM site, even though they spread a lot faster through viral marketing...

Anyway, just standing up to be counted!

Mike in NYC

'''Church of Reality.. '''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I'm an active member of the Church of Reality. I regularly post to the forums and can atest to there being many others who engage in discussion within the forums. I believe the Church of Reality deserves to have an entry within Wikipedia.

Chris J.

Northern California

'''CoR'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Missouri here, I totally support the Church of Reality. I think it's a very important movement towards uniting the world in facing
REALITY! Before we blow it up in the name of God, and...I'm sure your God would agree.:)
M.P. is one of the most brilliant philosophers of the century.

'''A CoR member.'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I am a CoR member in my own ways. I subscribe to the Church's teaching and very much keep up with any new church developments. I also advocate the church when ever I have a chance.

Travis,

Seattle WA

'''CoR'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I belong to the Church of Reality. I think it is insane to have to expose ourselves in order to become recognized.

Get with Reality.

Precipice

San Diego, CA

'''Reality, church of'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Hello,
I too am a member in fair standing or the Church of Reality. I recently heard that wikipedia dismissed us as a "parody religion". What BS !! That is like dismissimg W as a parody president. Sure, he has no integrity but he stold the election fair and square.
But seriousally, the voice of realists needs at least equal footing with those that want to base life on the ramblinge of people who claim to speak for various desert gods, all claiming to be the number 1 and only god.
Get real.
dennis lee trabue

'''I'm also member of Church of reality'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I really don't see one sound reason to not include Church of reality on Wikipedia. As far as I know it's the only religion based solely on reason and by no means on faith.

'''Church of Reality'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' As an active member of the Church of Reality, I must take exception to your deeply offensive characterization of our Church.

Far from being a "parody" or "vanity site", the COR has recently been given 501C3 tax exempt organization status by the IRS - something I strongly doubt the Flying Spaghetti Monster (which you allow a site entry) has acheived.

By mocking our faith you've engaged in religious discrimination, which may be actionable under U.S. law.

I think you owe members an apology.

And please, in the future, do a bit of honest research before ridiculing the beliefs of others.

Thank you

'''PROUD MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF REALITY!'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' The Church of Reality has only one member? Bah! A parody religion? spew. You should do some research. Marc equals one member, plus me equals two, so you've already lost, and as far as I can see there are many more devoted members of the Church of Reality. The CoR is a serious thang, it isn't there to make you laugh, it's there to make you think about reality and the world around you. I think the flying spaghetti monster just had his wings clipped.

- Thomas King, Auckland, NZ

'''Devote Member'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' I stand in support of our Religion. It is a non-profit religious organization with more than one member. CoR alive, well and growing in Michigan.

'''Church of Reality is valid'''

'''Overturn and Undelete''' Though created by Marc Perkel, the Church of Reality does have a following of more than just Marc himself. The Church of Reality is fascinating, I consider myself a member and I think what Wikipedia is doing is nothing more than religious censorship.

Toss aside what your personal beliefs are and understand that there are people, like myself, out there who dont subscribe to the standard Christian belief system that is so popular in the US. Is it that hard to fathom a religion based on what is real??? It seems a lot more valid to me because everthing Marc talks about is based on reality. Not faith in some non-existent being or entity that we are supposed to give our lives to.

I dont worship Marc Perkel. I dont worship the Church of Reality. I dont "worship" anyone or anything. I just believe in what is Real. Is that so difficult to swallow?

Lish Robinson

----

::What's hard to swallow is so many new users suddenly arriving at DRV—a page whose existence I didn't discover for months after I joined Wikipedia—and posting expressions of support using such similar styles of phrasing, spacing, and punctuation. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] [[User_talk:dpbsmith|(talk)]] 17:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

::And that ALL of them somehow managed to hijack MarcPerkel's account. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] [[User_talk:dpbsmith|(talk)]] 17:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

::: That's because I sent a link to this page out to all my non-existent members to ask them to vote to undelete. I pointed hundreds of people at this page. I'm hoping that I have at least convinced everyone that the Church of Reality has more than one member. --[[User:Marcperkel|Marcperkel]] 17:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

** I guess there is no point in just posting a lot of angry notes from COR members who feel slighted, that is irrelevant to the Wikipedia vetting process. But it is a bit infuriating when something that yre is a lot of good stuff there, far beyond what someone would do for a parody. So I see why Marc reposted them here. But I would think that it would be fairly typical for people who feel strongly about a topic to only show up here when there was a DRV; unless you were really into the workings of Wikipedia, you might not know about the process at all.

In any case, Cory Doctorow felt that the COR deserved a mention on BoingBoing, and both Cory and BoingBoing are well represented on Wikipedia![[User:Mar10029|Mike]] 18:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Church of Reality writes Conscientious Objector Status Policy

Church of Reality writes Conscientious Objector Status Policy

The Church of Reality today announces that it has posted it's policy on Conscientious Objector Status allowing for the first time for Atheists to opt out of military service based on religious reasons. These policies are being compiled as a preemptive strike against the possibility that the United States will re institute the draft and try to compel Realist to serve in a military fighting for an unjust cause.

"The Iraq war is an unjust war." says Marc Perkel, First One of the Church of Reality. "To participate in and unjust war is against our Sacred Principle of Positive Evolution which is one of our core religious commitments." The Church of Reality objects to the Iraq war for several reasons including the use of incendiary chemical weapons against the civilian population of Fallujah, jailing people without due process of law, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, the use of secret foreign prison camps, the use of torture, the denial of access to prisoners by the Red Cross, and the falsifying of information as justification for starting the war.

"If the human race is to evolve and distinguish ourselves from other animals then we are going to have to stop acting like animals. We are going to have to give up war and torture. The human race needs to rise to a higher standard and create a world where people live together in peace. As Realists practicing Realism we commit ourselves to a higher cause of making tomorrow better than today and leaving the next generation a better world that what we started with.", states Perkel. "The Church of Reality has determined that the war in Iraq is contrary to that cause."

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

More information about the church of Reality can be found at:

http://www.churchofreality.org

Policies on War and peace:

http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/war_and_peace/

The Sacred Principles:

http://www.churchofreality.org/wisdom/the_sacred_principles/

New York Times blocks email from Political / Religious Groups

Dear Church of Reality Members,

As many of you know besides being the glorious supreme leader of this religion I also have a "real job" hosting web sites, filtering spam, and other geek related stuff. And one of the sites I host the the Church of Reality itself, along with this email list. This list is being blocked by the New York Times email servers because political sites on my server does mass mailings to reporters about matters of political interest. I myself write letters to the editor and Church of Reality press releases on a regular basis.

Without explaining it all to you again I'm just going to pass on the email I sent my customers. I think this is an important issue because our religion considers communication to be extremely important. Here's the letter. Feel free to pass it on.

Dear Computer Tyme Customers,

We are having an interesting email issue with the New York Times tech staff regarding email to them and about 3000 other reporters that they host email for. Apparently there is some sort of consortium of news services that share common email services and spam filtering services. Their equipment is blocking email comping from my servers what prevents all of you from contacting various news agencies through my service.

The problem is that these servers - from what the techs told me - block all mass mailings regardless of content. If what they are saying is true then this situation applies not only to us - but also to anyone who is mass mailing reporters for any reason. And I do believe we are not being singled out. What is disturbing about this is that political free speech as well as press releases or any type of mass communication with the press is being blocked. This might explain the disconnect between political activists and the mainstream press. The press is not getting email from the people because it is being blocked.

As many of you know, I host email for a lot of very interesting people. One of those interesting people is PC Magazine writer John Dvorak who was having his messages bounce when trying to contact the New York Times. After several exchanges he asked me to look into it. So I called them and had a fascinating conversation. I don't often record conversations but I do sometime so that if there is something important I need to remember that I need to do I can review it. It save me having to attempt to read my handwriting which is nearly impossible. Although California has laws making it questionably legal to disclose recorded conversations, I believe in this instance it is justified because I am sure that it wasn't the intent of the legislature for these laws to conceal the fact that the people can not communicate with the press. So - I'm going to take my chances with this one because of the importance of the issues.

Here are the recordings. You can see if what I hear is the same as what you hear.

http://bulk.ctyme.com/nytimes.mp3
http://bulk.ctyme.com/nytimes2.mp3

These are unedited except that I cut out my home phone number in one place.

What is important here is that I'm sitting here about to write a major press release about the Church of Reality's position on the Iraq war and the moral implications of Realists fighting an unjust war in relation to Conscientious Objector Status and knowing that the email servers at the New York Times is going to block my release. Likewise I host a lot of political newsletters as well as my own letter to the editor list and I don't know if my letters are getting through.

This is an issue where people are sending free political speech to newspapers - this is clearly not spam - and a third party is blocking it. This block is on an IP basis and not by individual or domain so if one person sends a mass mailing they block everyone. In this case American Politics Journal's mass mailing blocked John Dvorak from communicating with New York Times reporters.

After the conversation the techs who control this have stated that they refuse to remove the blocks and that they have determined that all mass mailing to reporters will be blocked. They have flat out refused to fix the problem. Not just for the few hundred domains that I host, but for all the other people who want to send their messages to the press.

One of the things they mention is a company called Cipher Trust http://www.ciphertrust.com/ which seems to be the common blocking agent cutting off access from all these sites to all the companies. I'm still researching who these people are and who they block for. It sounds fairly massive.

Ironically, if their reporter, Judith Miller, hadn't conspired with Scooter Libby and the White House to sell America on this fake war we might not be writing them in the first place. But that's a rant for a different time.

The tech contact at the New York Times is Ed Muller. His email address is mulleea@nytimes.com . I consider it necessary that our servers as well as all the other servers who he is blocking be unblocked and it's time to lean on them to make that happen. So, here's what I suggest we do to start with.

First, the people on your lists who are not blocked needs to know about this. So send this message to everyone on your list so that they can individually post this on their blogs and write to the NYT directly. I want to show them that blocking free speech isn't possible and that there is no way that they can filter email coming from diverse sources. This is a message that we will get through. Please include the contact information and you can provide links to the recorded conversations. I will also be covering it on my blog at http://marc.perkel.com .

So - how want's to kick some butt?

Marc Perkel
Fearless Leader
Computer Tyme Hosting

----

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

The Church of Reality files for Trademark on the word "Reality"

PRESS RELEASE: Date 10-26-2005
From: Marc Perkel
Founder / First one - Church of Reality

CONTACT: marc@perkel.com

TITLE: The Church of Reality files for Trademark on the word "Reality"

The Church of Reality has filed for a trademark on the word "Reality". Trademark Application Number 78735626 in the International Class 045: Counseling in religious and spiritual matters was filed on October 18th 2005. The Church of Reality seeks to protect the intellectual property rights of the use of the trade mark "reality" to ensure that "Reality" is in the right hands. "Part of the reason behind the filing of this trademark", says Marc Perkel, Founder of the Church of Reality, "is to make sure that no one else files for it first. It is part of our mission as a religion to protect the integrity of reality. We wouldn't want the term reality to be under the control of religions who have nothing to do with reality."

"We also believe that very few, if any other religions will be affected by this trademark because even though members of other religions believe their religion is real, most all other religions have no reference to reality in their religious texts." Perkel states pointing out that the word Reality appears only once in the Bible and it's never used by God, Jesus, or any of the prophets. "Christians, for example", states Perkel, "would have no basis for a claim to oppose this trademark. Reality is simply not part of their published religious texts."

Even though Perkel jokes that if granted this trademark that every time a preacher says "reality" that they have to pay me a quarter, the Church of Reality is dedicated to spreading awareness of reality and encouraging people to make reality part of their daily lives. "In these days of complex trademark and intellectual property laws we feel that the Church of Reality should be the proper custodian of the rights to reality. Who is better suited to own reality than us? The Church of Reality is the rightful custodian of reality itself."

Perkel realizes that his trademark might not be granted but that even if his trademark is denied that the denial itself might protect reality for the people. "If we lose this the right way it might have the same effect as winning.", states Perkel. "The trademark office might decides that no one can own the right to reality, or they might decide that our previous trademark of "Church of Reality" also covers "Reality" by itself. So we could also win by losing this. We also feel that it will be good for people to debate the issue of whether or not terms like reality merit trademark protection. And we are also interested in seeing if any other religions oppose our trademark and attempt to state in legal documents what their relationship is to reality. All discussion of reality is a good thing."

The Church of Reality, who just this month received 501C3 tax exempt status, is a religion based on believing in everything that is real. Reality, as the name implies, is the central theme of the Church of Reality and represents or religious identity. Religions have different marketing themes that they use to compete for the religious mind space as they compete for membership. Except for the King James Bible, most all other Bibles are copyrighted works which generate income for their copyright holders. So people in the religion business do use intellectual property rights to protect their funding sources. We as the Church of Reality believe that our religious identity might be harmed in the future should a competing religion abuse our identity by confusing people leading them to believe that they are us and raising money in our name. Therefore we feel it is our responsibility to address this.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality gets IRS Tax Status

PRESS RELEASE: Date 10-19-2005
From: Marc Perkel
Founder / First one - Church of Reality

http://www.churchofreality.org

CONTACT: marc@perkel.com

TITLE: The Church of Reality get IRS non-profit recognition

The Church of Reality announces today that it has received 501(C)3 Tax Exempt IRS status. The IRS called today to confirm that the approval had been granted and that the paperwork will be sent in the next few days. The approval process taking nearly 2 years is finally complete after a long and complex process.

There were several complications with the Church of Reality getting it's approval relating to technical definitions as to what constitutes a "Church". Definitions of words mean different things to different organizations. The CoR recently amended it's application to apply as a religious organization rather than a Church to fit into IRS guidelines. A Church - according to the IRS - is a building where wedding a funerals are performed - where people get together - where there is a youth program, etc. As a new religion that was created on the Internet the CoR didn't yet fit this model and this created confusion in the approval process requiring the application be transferred to Washington for further scrutiny. The IRS is skeptical of Internet based churches.

Although the IRS looks closely at the religion itself it turned out that at no tome was the belief system an issue. There is no requirement that a religion worship a fictional deity in order to qualify as a religion. Much of the delay in processing was due to the IRS staff being overworked as agents are reassigned to investigate Islamic religious groups to see if they are funding terrorists.

CoR founder Marc Perkel says, "This is a big step forward for the Church of Reality. We could have become a church without applying for IRS status and that is perfectly legal. However we wanted to go through the process to demonstrate that we are a credible organization and that everything is legitimate. There is a psychological component to promoting a new religion and even though it's not required, to have IRS status creates the appearance of legitimacy. It shows that the CoR intends to be a major player in the competition for the religious mind space."

The Church of Reality is a religion based on believing in everything that is real. What makes it a religion is that what a person believes in is a personal choice. Most people choose to believe in some sort of fictional based religion. A Realist who practices Realism is someone who has dedicated himself to the pursuit of reality the way it really is and is committed to evangelizing reality to move society in a reality based direction. Realism is a doubt based rather than a faith based religion where truth is purified through scrutiny.

Information on the belief system of the Church of Reality can be found on the their web site at http://www.churchofreatity.org

Intelligent Design isn't even a Theory

Letter to the Editor

Bush said that schools should teach the so called Intelligent Design theory in schools. Intelligent Design merely states that life is complex and had to be designed by "someone", and stops there. But when you ask who the designer is, they don't want to talk about that, because all of a sudden ID becomes a thinly veiled front for Creationism. If life requires a designer, then who is the designer and who made the designer? If you think through what ID is saying, you could conclude that God doesn't exist because something as complex as God couldn't "just happen".

The difference between science and fictional beliefs is that science isn't afraid of scrutiny. Those who promote ID run when you ask the question, "Who is the designer?" Science isn't afraid to think things through and ask the tough questions. Trying to rename Creationism as Intelligent Design is dishonest, and Christians aren't going to win over any souls by being caught taking liberties with the truth. They should think about their own commandments about bearing false witness.

---

Read more on the Church of Reality Evolution Page.

New web site - Choose Reality

I started a new web site called Choose Reality.org. This web site is all about promoting the phrase "Choose Reality" and getting people to put Choose Reality on their blogs and web sites. I'm trying to get enought sites together in a reality movement to counter the threat to civilization by the Christian and Muslim religions who are at war with each other.

If you look up at the top of this page you can see a sample of what it might look like on your web site. Or you can put it on the bottom of your web page. So if you want to help promote reality before it goes away, this is a good way to do it.

Wikipedia deletes Church of Reality

The web site Wikipedia deleted the entry for the definition of the Church of Reality from it's database. Wikipedia which claims to be a the free-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit is nothing of the sort. It seems to be intolerant of reality based religion.

Church of Reality is up for IRS 501c3 non profit Approval

I've finally after almost 2 years made it to the top of the pile for IRS not for profit status for the Church of Reality. I have a ton of work to do to get them new information and to answer the questions they sent me, but I am optimistic that they are going to "bless" reality with a religion.

I've been doing a LOT of work on the Church of Reality Web Site and it's really looking good. If you haven't been there in a while you will see a lot of new material to read. And - I even got a guy who is fixing the spelling and grammer errors.

I need to be on Larry King Live

With all the religious insanity out there on the talk shows - I need to be part of it. I need to be on Larry King Live to debate these people about what is real. And why me? Because I'm the founder of the Church of Reality - a religion based on believing in everything that's real.

What I want to do to challenge these religions in debates. I'm ready to take then on in any forum with a significant audience. Every time the word reality is said it challenges their belief systems based on what is real. America has turned it's back on the real world and it's time to bring reality back into religion. If anyone can hook me up - please let me know.

marc@perkel.com

Does God choose the Pope?

In theory - God controls the cardinals when they choose the pope so that the cardinals choose the pope that is God's choice. If that is true then:

1. Why doesn't it take only one vote that's unaminous?
   
2. If some cardinals vote for someone other that the elected pope - does that mean they are out of touch with God's will?
   
3. If enough cardinals are out of touch with God - then could they elect a pope that God wouldn't have chosen?
   
4. Why doesn't God just show up and pick the pope?
   

Rolling stone Exposes the Dominionists

Is the religious takeove of America just a myth? This Rolling Stone Article shows Christian evangelicals are plotting to remake America in their own image.

It's February, and 900 of America's staunchest Christian fundamentalists have gathered in Fort Lauderdale to look back on what they accomplished in last year's election -- and to plan what's next. As they assemble in the vast sanctuary of Coral Ridge Presbyterian, with all fifty state flags dangling from the rafters, three stadium-size video screens flash the name of the conference: RECLAIMING AMERICA FOR CHRIST. These are the evangelical activists behind the nation's most effective political machine -- one that brought more than 4 million new Christian voters to the polls last November, sending George W. Bush back to the White House and thirty-two new pro-lifers to Congress. But despite their unprecedented power, fundamentalists still see themselves as a persecuted minority, waging a holy war against the godless forces of secularism. To rouse themselves, they kick off the festivities with "Soldiers of the Cross, Arise," the bloodthirstiest tune in all of Christendom: "Seize your armor, gird it on/Now the battle will be won/Soon, your enemies all slain/Crowns of glory you shall gain."

Meet the Dominionists -- biblical literalists who believe God has called them to take over the U.S. government. As the far-right wing of the evangelical movement, Dominionists are pressing an agenda that makes Newt Gingrich's Contract With America look like the Communist Manifesto. They want to rewrite schoolbooks to reflect a Christian version of American history, pack the nation's courts with judges who follow Old Testament law, post the Ten Commandments in every courthouse and make it a felony for gay men to have sex and women to have abortions. In Florida, when the courts ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed, it was the Dominionists who organized round-the-clock protests and issued a fiery call for Gov. Jeb Bush to defy the law and take Schiavo into state custody. Their ultimate goal is to plant the seeds of a "faith-based" government that will endure far longer than Bush's presidency -- all the way until Jesus comes back.

More in Article.

Church of Reality on Death and Dying

The Church of Reality has today posted it's official position on Death and Dying. This is in response to statements buy other religions that want to impose their religious views beyond the limits of their own membership. The entire position can be read on this web page.

http://www.churchofreality.org/death.htm

As to Teri Schaivo specifically, we in the Church of Reality believe that the courts did the right thing. They determined that Teri would not have chosen to live that way and that her husband has the right to make that choice and speak in behalf of his wife. We strongly support individual choices and the choices of the individual's guardian without the interference of the government or other religions. We therefore thanks the courts for upholding the law that protects these rights that we hold sacred. We honor Michial Shiavo, her husband, for making a great personal sacrifice to defend his wife's wishes when he could have walked away leaving her to exist in a living death.

Teri Shaivo died on February 25th 1990. May the living now have peace.

Feel free to contact me. I give a hell of an interview. I want to refute the position of the Vatican!

The Church of Reality is a religion based on believing in everything that's real.
http://www.churchofreality.org

Jeb Bush's Doctor - William P. Cheshire - Who is he?

The Diva sent me this:

Regarding William P. Cheshire, Governor Jeb Bush's appointee to review Theresa Schiavo's medical condition:

CNN has failed to mention Cheshire's religious conflict of interest, or to give any information regarding his past activism in the area of medical ethics vs. religious dogma.

Cheshire is a Christian first, a physician second, and stated so explicitly in Volume 17:2 of "Ethics & Medicine":

Excerpted from "Exit Ramp"

"The cross of Christ marks the true vertical, and his outstretched arms the true horizontal. Christ's life, death and resurrection are the guideposts that orient us along the slopes of life as we journey toward eternity."

URL: http://www.ethicsandmedicine.com/17/2/17-2-exitramp.htm

Disregarding established ethical policies and positions of the AMA and similar groups, deferring instead to scripture and religious tradition, Cheshire's actions and statements in this case must be considered in context, if CNN is to act in a responsible journalistic fashion.

Public Prayer for Jews and Christians Only

RICHMOND, Va. The federal appeals court in Richmond will hear arguments today on whether Chesterfield County should allow a Wiccan priestess to give the opening prayer at Board of Supervisors meetings.

The county refused to put Cynthia Simpson on the list of religious leaders invited to pray at board meetings. The board told her the invocations "are traditionally made to a divinity that is consistent with the Judeo-Christian tradition."

A federal judge called the county's invocation policy unconstitutional, saying that Chesterfield County officials cannot endorse an official religious preference while excluding other religions from opening board meetings with a prayer.

The county is challenging the judge's ruling before the U-S Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Two Radio Interviews I did receintly

I've done two interviews lately about my Church of Reality. On December 27th I was on Air America Radio being interviewed by Mike Malloy. It was a good interview and you can listen to it Here.

Then - later that week I talked to Joe Vecchio on the Cup of Joe blog. That interview was also very good.

I'm looking for other interview opportunites to talk about my new emerging religion, the Church of Reality. The Church of Reality is openly challenging the claim of some right wing Christian groups that they have taken control of America and that they own the moral high ground. We assert that we Realists own the moral high ground and our Sacred Principles are superior to the Ten Commandments.

So - I am looking for opportunities to debate religion - especially on the basis of what is real. America has turned it's back on reality and it will be punished for doing so. I give a good interview and I am a sharp debater and I'm someone who is interesting enough to attract an audience - especially during ratings periods. Listen to the interview and if you like what you hear - there's more where that came from.

Marc Perkel on Mike Malloy's Show on Air America Radio

Dear Church of Reality Membership,

Last night's interview on the Mike Malloy Show on Air America went very well. It lasted about 16 minutes less commercials and music and my only regret was that it didn't last longer. I don't know how many people it reached but I'm sure it was a lot. For those of you who missed it - you can listen to it on the web at:

Mike Malloy Show

Additionally my radio guy, Dave Lewis, created 4 radio spots for the Church of Reality. I thing the first two are particularly good and hope to actually run them somewhere once I refigure a plan for radio. You can listen to them at:

1. The Prince and Hives
   
2. Wimp
   
3. Father and Son
   
4. Reverend Chuck D. Change
   

I'm pretty busy today but just wanted to let you share in these new Church of Reality audio treasures and let me know what you think. This is just the beginning. I want everyone on the planet to hear the name Church of Reality. Any thing you can do to make that happen is greatly appreciated.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

More Thoughts on Gay Marriage

I keep struggling the the Gay Marriage issue and it's not something that is an easy decision for me. But I am still against it because it's a matter of trying to stretch a definition beyond reality by slowly pussing the limits over the line. But - I do support civil unions - and this has nothing to do with "morality".

Let's say I were to tell you that I believed that a dog and a cat were the same species. That a dog is just a different form of cat. Am I wrong? Yes - but - they both have hair - walk on 4 legs - have claws - in fact are better than 90% genetically identical. So - why isn't a dog a cat? Why don't we just broaden the definition of cat to include dogs? See what I mean?

So - is there a difference between gay and heterosexual relationships? Well - of everyone who is on earth today, their biological parents are a man and a woman - and none of them come from two men or two women. There is a difference and it is a significant difference. It's about our very existence. The word marriage has meaning and it's not the same any more that a dog is a species of cat.

But - what about non-reproducing heterosexuals? Well - there's the fuzzy line thing again. And - as I have said many time - if it were up to me to move the line - it would be the other way. But - I have an even more interesting point to make about where the line should be.

Clearly reproducing heterosexuals are within the definition of marriage and clearly marrying a pet is clearly outside the definition. Gays want the line moved to include them arguing equal protection and pointing out the real fact that many of these relationships have lasted for decades and are in fact real relationships.

But also in the life are poligimous heterosexuals. The Mormons truely believe that poligamy is OK and only denounce poligamy for political purposes and do it underground. In Utah there are some 20,000 to 30,000 poligimous families with children. So - where do they fit into the argument?

To me if there is a "line" that we are talking about regarding the definition of marriage - then poligimous heterosexuals with children are closer to the definitions of marriage than gays are. So - if we are moving the line all the way to gays - then we also have to include poligimous heterosexuals. You can't just skip over parts of the line and include gays and not mormons.

So - I ask the question of my gay friends and family - are you willing to include poligimous mormons in marriage? If you respond that marriage is limited to only 2 people then my response is yes = it is limited to a man and a woman too. You see - you can't point to two as absolute and say heterosexuality and reproduction is optional. I can't take the argument seriously unless you are also including Mormons - and then there's the problem of multiple same sex marriages. And - why should I be prohibited from marrying my sister or brother if we are non-reproducing?

Lines are interesting things. If I have sex with a girl one hour before her 18th birthday then I'm a rapist. If I wait an hour - then I'm not. Suppose I have sex with her one hour before her 18th birthday on the west coast but she was both on the east coast and that's 3 times zones ahead of California making her technically 18 if you take that into account. Would I be guilty of rape then?

So - as I keep saying - having come to this conclusion I am still uncomfirtable with it. But - a dog is not a cat and a same sex relationship is not a marriage. Find a different word - grant similar legal rights to it - I'm fine with it.

At some point when the technology exists for same sex couples to reproduce then I will rethink this because that would cross the line. But until then - I can't support it.

Perkel to be Interviewed on Air America Radio

Good news on the radio interviews front. Mike Malloy of Air America Radio has agreed to interview me on Wednesday December 29th at 11:00pm East coast time (8:00 pacific time) about the Church of Reality. I will be on for 30 minutes (15 minutes less commercials) and will be reaching hundreds of thousands of listeners.

You all can tune in to Air America Radio at http://www.airamericaradio.com and listen to it live on the Internet.

I'm hoping that once I'm on this that others pick me up too. These things sometimes snowball. I'm generally very good in interviews - especially on radio where looks don't matter and I can be home in my PJs ranting to the world. And I will get to talk about reality and get people asking the sacred question.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality - about to launch!

San Francisco, CA - Marc Perkel today announces the official launch of the Church of Reality starting with a radio campaign on KFRC Radio in the Bay Area. Perkel is spending $7500 for a three week radio campaign to raise money to spread the word about his new church. Perkel hopes to challenge other religions on what is real and what is moral and raise the status of reality in society.

Church of Reality Web Site

Contact
Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality
marc@perkel.com
"If it's real - we believe in it!"

Here's the seven sacred missions:

# We believe in Reality - the way it really is! - If it's real - we believe in it. The Church of Reality is a Personal Commitment to the Truth. We Realists explore the universe together with our minds. We think about thinking. We wonder about wondering. We attempt to understand the Understanding of Understanding. We ponder the Great Questions. We are a curious people and we are bound together in our quest to know more.

# We Spread the Sacred Message - Reality - Our mission is to promote reality in society. Every time we mention Reality we spread the Sacred Message. We are here to ask the Sacred Question - "What is Real?" in order to raise the status of Reality in society. We want people to consider reality when making important decisions. By spreading the Sacred Message we cause people to be Real in the Sacred Moment (which is Now). Our mission is to say "Reality" as many times as we can and to get other people to think about reality as often as we can. We introduce the Terminology of Reality into the Tree of Knowledge so that we have a common vocabulary to talk about reality in religious terms.

# We Choose the Sacred Direction - Forward - The Sacred Direction is forward - onward and upward. Our Principle of Positive Evolution commits us to envision a future that is better than today. We are one planet and we are all in this together on our little ball in the universe. In order to answer the Sacred Question and explore our reality society must move forward. We take responsibility for our future and we commit to making tomorrow better than today.

# We Honor the Tree of Knowledge - The Tree of Knowledge represents the sum total of all human understanding. It is what separates us from the animals. The Tree of Knowledge represents the soul of humanity. We are better than we were hundreds of years ago because our Tree of Knowledge has grown and if we continue to evolve in the Sacred Direction our Tree of Knowledge will continue to grow. It is through the tree that we explore reality as it really is and attempt to answer the Sacred Question - What is Real?

# We Ask the Sacred Moral Question - What is Good? - The Sacred Moral Question is, "Is this a Good Thing?" What does "good" mean? That too is part of the Sacred Moral Question. We believe in the principle of positive evolution and the sacred direction as well as the other Sacred Principles as a foundation for determining right and wrong. We believe that right and wrong are important concepts that deserve to be carefully considered in realistic terms. Often reality is ignored and no one asks if the decisions that are being made are a good thing.

We believe that when reality is ignored and no one asks if the decision is good that we end up with bad results. We as Realists are dedicated to Asking the Sacred Moral Question so that we make better choices so we can move in the sacred Direction. The commitment to Reality is a commitment to truth, honesty, wisdom, and responsibility. The Church of Reality is committed to getting the moral questions right.

# We Issue the Sacred Challenge - The Sacred Challenge is a challenge to other faiths and religions to ask themselves - "How do we know that what we believe is real?" The Sacred Challenge applies first and foremost to this church itself. Our Principle of Self Scrutiny demands that we constantly audit ourselves to make sure we are not deluding ourselves. We consider Reality to be a sacred thing and there are many other who claim their beliefs to be real when it just isn't. Many people want to be good moral people and are trying to "do what is right" but what they think is right has never been put to the reality test. Our message to people of other faiths is - question everything - challenging your beliefs is a good thing. We ask you to fully understand what exactly you do believe. We therefore ask other faiths to adopt the Principle of Self Scrutiny, to ask the Sacred Question, and to encourage your members to challenge your beliefs on the basis of if it is actually real. We require our members to scrutinize us. We challenge you to match us.

# We make it Happen - We are a religion that is an activist religion. We don't just find problems - we solve problems. We are committed to coming up with solutions and to take responsibility to bring the concept into reality. We make sure that the job is done right. We are a community and we do the work to make community work. We go out and learn and we try to understand and we spend a lot of time thinking and we give of ourselves for the common good of all people. In the Spirit of the Tree - our shared knowledge - we support sharing. It is our duty to look around and figure out how to make it all work.

Islam executes children for being forced to have sex

The force children to have sex and then they execute them for thier crime. To Islamics sex is a higher crime than murder. This is what happens when religion controls the government. This could be what America's future looks like if we don't get back to reality.

Here's the Story

The Seven Sacred Missions of the Church of Reality

What does the Church of Reality do? What is it that we are about? Here is a quick overview of what we do using some of our own Terminology. These are the Seven Sacred Missions of the Church of Reality.

1. We believe in Reality - the way it really is! - If it's real - we believe in it. The Church of Reality is a Personal Commitment to the Truth. We Realists explore the universe together with our minds. We think about thinking. We wonder about wondering. We attempt to understand the Understanding of Understanding. We ponder the Great Questions. We are a curious people and we are bound together in our quest to know more.

2. We Spread the Sacred Message - Reality - Our mission is to promote reality in society. Every time we mention Reality we spread the Sacred Message. We are here to ask the Sacred Question - "What is Real?" in order to raise the status of Reality in society. We want people to consider reality when making important decisions. By spreading the Sacred Message we cause people to be Real in the Sacred Moment (which is Now). Our mission is to say "Reality" as many times as we can and to get other people to think about reality as often as we can. We introduce the Terminology of Reality into the Tree of Knowledge so that we have a common vocabularity to talk about reality in religious terms.

3. We Choose the Sacred Direction - Forward - The Sacred Direction is forward - onward and upward. Our Principle of Positive Evolution commits us to envision a future that is better than today. We are one planet and we are all in this together on our little ball in the universe. In order to answer the Sacred Question and explore our reality society must move forward. We take responsibility for our future and we commit to making tomorrow better than today.

4. We Honor the Tree of Knowledge - The Tree of Knowledge represents the sum total of all human understanding. It is what separates us from the animals. The Tree of Knowledge represents the soul of humanity. We are better than we were hundreds of years ago because our Tree of Knowledge has grown and if we continue to evolve in the Sacred Direction our Tree of Knowledge will continue to grow. It is through the tree that we explore reality as it really is and attempt to answer the Sacred Question - What is Real?

5. We Ask the Sacred Moral Question - What is Good? - The Sacred Moral Question is, "Is this a Good Thing?" What does "good" mean? That too is part of the Sacred Moral Question. We believe in the principle of positive evolution and the sacred direction as well as the other Sacred Principles as a foundation for determining right and wrong. We believe that right and wrong are important concepts that deserve to be carefully considered in realistic terms. Often reality is ignored and no one asks if the decisions that are being made are a good thing. We believe that when reality is ignored and no one asks if the decision is good that we end up with bad results. We as Realists are dedicated to Asking the Sacred Moral Question so that we make better choices so we can move in the sacred Direction

6. We Issue the Sacred Challenge - The Sacred Challenge is a challenge to other faiths and religions to ask themselves - "How do we know that what we believe is real?" The Sacred Challenge applies first and foremost to this church itself. Our Principle of Self Scrutiny demands that we constantly audit ourselves to make sure we are not deluding ourselves. We consider Reality to be a sacred thing and there are many other who claim their beliefs to be real when it just isn't. Many people want to be good moral people and are trying to "do what is right" but what they think is right has never been put to the reality test. Our message to people of other faiths is - question everything - challenging your beliefs is a good thing. We ask you to fully understand what exactly you do believe. We therefore ask other faiths to adopt the Principle of Self Scrutiny, to ask the Sacred Question, and to encourage your members to challenge your beliefs on the basis of if it is actually real. We require our members to scrutinze us. We challenge you to match us.

7. We make it Happen - We are a religion that is an activist religion. We don't just find problems - we solve problems. We are committed to coming up with solutions and to take responsibility to bring the concept into reality. We make sure that the job is done right. We are a community and we do the work to make community work. We go out and learn and we try to understand and we spend a lot of time thinking and we give of ourselves for the connon good of all people. In the Spirit of the Tree - our shared knowledge - we support sharing. It is our duty to look around and figure out how to make it all work.

There's a New Kid on the Block

I have been working a LOT lately with the Church of Reality web site. The Titles and Terminology page in particular:

http://www.churchofreality.org/terms.htm

I have doubled the number of definitions and I hav included far more detailed explanations of the Terms. But I have included new concepts not found in any other religion. These new concepts include terminology for understanding cult behaviour. I have included a number of tests and examples for people to determine if that are in a cult. For example - if you are "one of the chosen" - you are in a cult. I have included definitions that talk about being addicted to praise and Ego Masturbation that keep people plugged into the cult mind.

The world is becoming a cult and the time has come for the CoR to step out and make itself known. Adding this new material is a step in the process. I am still on track for our first radio campaign and I am in the process of crafting the message. For those who don't know - I used to own a couple of Computer Stores about 15 years ago and radio works. I've done this before and I think I can do it again.

The plan is for the radio to be self sustaining and leverage the Church into the news media. Get some interviews on bay Area newscasts and talk shows. And hopefully the word will spread. The plan is to get noticed by the other religoins and get people talking about the name and what it means to have a reality based religion. If it accomplishes no more that that it will have a huge impact at raising the status of reality in society.

So - that's the plan. Anyone want to help make it happen I'm always looking for ideas. Mostly at this point the mission is to spread the word. There's a new kid on the block and his name is Reality - and he's here to stay.

Marc Perkel
First One
Church of Reality

Church of Reality opens Religion Discussion Forum

I have started a religion discussion forum for the Church of Reality. If you want to debate religion or learn how to spread the world about Reality then Click Here. And remember - Darwin loves you!

Church of Reality Logos

For those of you who like my church of Reality - If you want to link to it - here's a logo you can use.

If it's real - we believe in it!

Church of Reality open Membership Email List

This is the first membership mailing of the Church of Reality - the religion I started besed on believing in everything that is real.

If you are getting this email it's because I added you to my Church of Reality mailing list. I'm starting to expand the Church of Reality web site and create some more useful content. If you don't want to be a member of this list - removal instructions are at the bottom of the page.

This list is an announce only list and I will keep the church spam down to a reasonable level.

It's time for me to make the Church of Reality a happening organization. I am still waiting for IRS approval - but the IRS is totally screwed up these days - like all other parts of the government - has fallen to almost dysfunctional. Bush has a lot of the IRS staff chasing terrorist funding and doesn't have the manpower to process not for profit orgs in a timely manner. It will probably take till 2005 before we get an answer on the 501(c)3 status. But - it's time to start moving to make something happen before then.

So - first thing is - spread the word. Here's the link to get people to join the list.

http://www.churchofreality.org/mailman/listinfo/membership

Feel free to pass this around and post this link on your web pages. I want to get as many interested people as possible.

With the election this year I am particularly frustrated with how much the masses can be persuaded to ignore reality. One of the goals of the Church of Reality is to raise reality to a higher level of consideration. Reality has become unimportant in the world and America has turned it's back of reality. I want to start a revolution to bring back reality into the daily lives of people and get them to ask the sacred question - "Is this Real?"

To that end this list is the first step in making that happen and the first mission is to grow this list. So - anything that any of you can do to help will be appreciated. After all - if they take away reality - what do we have left?

If for some reason any of you who I put in this list initially wants to unsubscribe - the information below will remove you from the list.

Thanks in Advance
Marc Perkel

What is it like to be brainwashed?

This is what it's like. Here's a moonie that wrote me. This person has no idea she's brainwashed. Note - according to her - the Moonies are Republicans. Something I've known for years. Moomies hate paragraphs.

I get a lot of Moonie email like this and they all say I have no right to speak. I say - fuck them. Here's the letter. What do you think?

-------------------

Hello. I just wanted to comment on your sight. I happen to know more about some of these religious organizations more than you do. In fact a lot more. I was searching the web (curiously) wondering what kind of things are said about "moonies" on the web. I happened to come upon your sight, which I think is (to say the least) very one sided. You may be a democrat, but that gives you no right to criticize a religion just because they are republicans. I have attended more organizations with the Unification Church, than I believe many have. Let me just say that, you've only heard half of what is said about the Unification Church and Theology. Let me tell you, Rev. Sun Myung Moon is definately not trying to "take over the world." Let me also ask you, have you ever even heard ANY of the Unification Theology? If so, I doubt you would be so negative about this religion. You have no idea how amazing this man is. You have absolutely NO idea how much heartache and suffering this man has gone through, to change the world, little by little. For example, did you know that he spent years and years in prison, being tortured immensly, with 1 cup of rice a day, and that he couldn't bare to watch the other prisoners starve, so he gave his tiny little cup to the others, and starved himself. Did you know that, when he was 16 he received a revelation from Jesus Christ Himself and spent many tearfilled days pondering over this revelation. Rev. Sun Myung Moon is not and evil villain trying to obtain the world. He is simply a humble man striving for world peace. You may think that I'm "brainwashed" and that Rev. Moon has me under "his spell" but let me just say that, if the world is so dumb as to ignore Our Savior once again then this world will surely parish. I have so much more that I want to share with you, and to spread my knowledge about Rev. Sun Myung Moon, but that would take me a month. I just wanted to say that, you shouldn't try to "brainwash" people, and make them think that "moonies" are "brainwashing" people. You should be mature enough to let everybody else in the world ponder on their own, and let them decide which path to take, and which religion to believe in. I just want to leave you with the Unification motto, "Live for the sake of others." Sincerely: Amy Shank

New Word: Extinctionist

I'm inventing a new word. The name for a religious belief that is the opposite of evolution. I call the Extinctionists. Evolutionists are people who believe that people and animals are evolving - and getting better. Evolving into something greater - improving.. But and Extinctionist is the exact opposite. Not only don't they believe in Evolution - but they envistion ultimate destruction. To them the end of the world is near - the end of time - and we cease to exist. They justify this position by expecting an afterlife - but if they are wrong - we merely cease to exist. We become extinct.

I have made the opposite choice - to evolve - to move forward towards a better tomorrow. Becuase after all - our existence is all we have and if we lose that - we lose everything. And if we make the wrong choices - we will merely cease to exist along with millions of other species who have failed to evolve. I say - the extinctionists are wrong. And that we should resist the direction the are trying to take us in.

Church of Reality Logos

OK - I have some new logos that have been submitted to become the Church of Reality logos. Looking for some feedback on what people think.

The halo image is very powerful. A halo is a symbol that says this object is holy - or scared. Which is what the Church of Reality is all about. So - "R" stands for reality - then the Halo over the R means Reality is Holy. Or in this case the belief in reality is holy. The dharma of the Church of Reality is to make Reality sacred. Thus putting a halo on reality symbolizes the purpose of the Church.

People have asked me - "Why are you degrading reality down to a religion?" And I can understand that. In pure science it doesn't matter if this planet gets sucked into a black hole or not. But we have made a subjective call that our survival is better than our extinction and that the progress of man towards a better understanding of reality is something that is important to us. Because this decision is subjective - it is a religious decision. It is what we choose to believe in. So we make reality a sacred thing and it forms the basis for our religious identity. We are Realists - practicing Realism - asking the sacred question - "What is Real".

The symbol - a halo over an R is something that I like. It's simple so people can draw it on things to compete with the cross and the cressent that other religions use.

I'd like to get some feedback on this and see what others think of the logos and if you have and better suggestions - let me know.

Death Tax and Church Donations

Now that the death taxes have been eliminated for the super rich - I was wondering if this has cut into charatable donations from estates that uned to be used to reduce the tax burden. Has this hurt church donations?

Why is anyone still Catholic?

It amazes my why anyone is sticking with the Catholic religion. What is with this cult? It appears that the Catholic Church's idea of "reform" is to overturn the laws that make them responsible for priests fucking children.

So - if you are Catholic - how can you justify giving money to an organization that opposes church responsibility for priests fucking children? The church stood by for decades knowing what was going on - covering up what was going on - and not that they are being held accountable they continue to side with child molesters.

You might ask, "Why should the whole church be held responsible for what a few preists did?" The answer is - it wasn't just a few priests - and - the church knew about it and allowed it. The church took an active part in moving these priests around to cover it up. The didn't even kick them out. The moved them to a different community where they found new fresh young boys to fuck.

So if the church didn't know about it - that would be somewhat different. But in this case the church was an active participant. So if the church has to suffer for it - that's a good thing. It sends a message to other churches that you can fuck children.

I don't think the penalty is harsh enough because the Catholics still don't get the message. The are still fucking boys - and they are still transfering and promoting the criminals who are fucking children. Cardinal Bernard Law was reciently promoted to the Vatican after being run out of town in Boston for his role in covering up for priests who were fucking children. This appointment shows clearly that the Church doesn't take the matter seriously.

If you give money to the Catholic Church - you are supporting priests fucking children.

Bishops Support Move to Overturn Law

Sat Jul 17, 4:55 PM ET

Sue McGuire for KCBS-740 AM

(KCBS)--The priest sexual abuse scandal is moving forward on two legal fronts as cases of alleged clergy abuse wend through California courts.

Some Catholic bishops are supporting a request in federal court to overturn a law that allows decades old allegations to proceed.

KCBS reporter George Harris says the so-called Burton Law, named for its sponsor Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, drops the statute of limitations on claims of sexual abuse.

But California Catholic bishops call the law "unconstitutional."

"All of the bishops in the twelve diocese in California approved taking this position," said Maury Healy a spokesman for the San Francisco Archdiocese. He says the Burton Law unfairly targets the Catholic Church.

"In January 2003, the bishops issued a statement which warned against the effects of this law," Healy said.

He says by supporting a challenge of the Burton Law in federal court, bishops are not trying to avoid paying the enormous judgments that have been levied in lawsuits brought by alleged victims. "Portland has paid off 53-million-dollars alone."

The Southern California U.S. District Court is hearing the appeal of the Burton Law.

IRS holding up approval of my Church of Reality

Still waiting for the IRS to make a decision about if they consider the Church of Reality a real church. It's supposed to take 3 months and now it's 7 1/2 months and no word. Last time I called the IRS person said they were behind and didn't know when they were going to catch up.

I'm beginning to wonder if they are giving Christians preferential treatment and staling on non-christian applications. Or - at least part of the IRS is collapsing into totall disfunctionality. Is the IRS really 5 months behind normal approving 501c3 organizations? If so - why? Something funny is going on at the IRS. Does anyone out there have any information on why they might be taking so long?

Working on church of Reality Doctrine

As some of you know - I am the First one of the Church of Reality and I'm working on an interesting question that many people are asking. The question - will the Church of Reality lose it's focus and become corrupted like all the other religions.

Isn't it inevitable that if the Church of Reality becomes successful that it has to become corrupted by its success? That's what most people believe - and - am am attempting to address this issue. The real question is - what can I do now to prevent it from happening. How is the Church of Reality different than other religions?

Other religions are based on mythology. Thus if one myth evolves into another myth it's really not a significant change. How does one argue that one myth is better than another myth? But the Church of Reality is dedicated to reality. So if the Church of Reality converts to mythology then that is a more fundamental form of change that from myth to myth.

Reality doesn't go away after you stop believing in it. So if the Church of Reality gets off course - it can always come back to reality. Reality is the solid rock - the lighthouse - and it is always there no matter if people believe in it or not.

I have a joke about if a Christian who believes he can fly and a Bhudist who believes he can fly both jump off a bridge at the same time - who will hit the water first? The point you see is gravity applies equally to all religions and belief doesn't change reality. So - there is reason and hope to believe that the Church of Reality is different in that it is a religion that is grounded in the real world and therefore has a way to repair itself and get back to it's roots.

Reality is like a rock - it's solid - it's real - and it can be found if someone get lost. All you have to do is let reality back into your heart and let it guide you back to realism.

But - that doesn't mean that it can't be corrupted. So - I'm working on a plan - some tests - so that these become automatic clues that the Church of Reality might be straying off course. And - I'm looking for suggestions on how to keep reality real - and not become RINO - Reality In Name Only.

So - for example. If the Church of Reality becomes about me - Marc Perkel - then it's off course. I am not a diety - I have no special "powers" and I'm just a guy with an idea. If this doesn't work out someone else - hopefully - will come and do it right. But reality is still there no matter what. So - if the Church of Reality starts worshiping me - it's off course.

Or - if you are being forced to believe in things that are not supported in logic or science - that's a bad sign. The Church of Reality is to be judges by it's fruits and not just on what is being preached. It has to produce results.

America is a Christian Nation - Controlled by the Moonies

Well finally the "mainstream media" has caught up with the Internet. CBS News finally ran the story of the Reverend Syung Mung Moon being corrinated as the messiah by members of Congress in the Dirkson office building. I blogged about it weeks ago. Where is NBC, ABC and CNN on this story? Hiding it. That's because the moonies are so powerful that they can bury this story. It's not what you see in the news that's scary - it's what you don't see.

Moon owns a lot of the media - He owns United Press International - and The Washington Times. Daddy Bush is a regular paid speaker at Moon mass weddings and Moon is the one behind the take down the cross put up the crown movement. The Christians do run America - the Moonie Christians. And as you can see, members of Congress are crowning him King. So it's official. Who are the true Christians? The Moonies are! Hail the Moonies - the only True Christians!

Its funny - Christians have been calling America a Christian nation with out a clue as to why we have the separation of Church and State. They just don't get it. So - maybe they will get it now. Yes - the Christians have taken over and they rule America. But - which Christians are in charge? The Moonies are in charge. So Christians - how do you feel about that? How do you like living in a nation where the Moonies control the state?

Religion controling government is a great idea when it's your religion that's running it. But if it's someone else's religion - then that's a very different story.

Christians have emailed me and said - "America is a Christian nation - and if you don't like it - get out!" Well - America is a Christian moonie nation - and if you don't like being a Moonie - get out!

Feels kind of different to be on the other side of that - doesn't it?

Here's a piece of the CBS Story:

The Washington Post reported that Moon received a crown that was placed on his head. The crown was carried on a pillow by Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Ill., who wore white gloves, the newspaper said.

The Post said Moon, 85, delivered a lengthy speech at the "Crown of Peace" ceremony. The newspaper quoted Moon as saying he was "sent to Earth . . . to save the world's six billion people. . . . Emperors, kings and presidents . . . have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."

So - you see Christians - you were right. Jesus has returned in the form of the reverened Syung Myung Moon. Moon is officially Jesus because America is a Christian nation - and the nation officially crowned Moon messiah. And if the government crowns you messiah - which they just did - then it's official. America officially recognizes Moon as Lord - our father - the True Parents.

From this day forward your religion as you have know it is over. You will worship Reverened Moon as God - the True Messiah. Jesus has returned. Resistance is futule. You will be assimilated. You are hereby ordered by the authority of the United States of America to bend your knee and pray to Moon now and to publically acknowledge that Moon is Christ returning.

Look Christians - this is about your eternal soul. Do you want to Burn in Hell forever? I don't think so. Well - there's only one way for you to save yourself and that is to accept the True Father into your heart and worship HIM. Reverened Moon is your true father and he has demonstrated his authority by having America - the greatest Christian nation on Earth - crown him King. Why else would former presidents like poppy Bush speak at Moon mass weddings? Why else is the leadership of the christian world sucking up to him? How do you explain miracles like this if Moon isn't the true father? Are you going to take a change with your soul and risk frying in Hell forever? It's time to bend your knee and worship Moon the way these members of Congress are. Democrats and Republicans joining together in harmony to worship Moon. This has to be a miracle! God is making it happen for Reverend Sun Myung Moon!

How about it Christians? Sounds kind of funny being on the other side of that - doesn't it? of cource - as the Founder of the Church of Reality I think all Christian religions are just as stupid. But I wanted to push the issue a little so that you can experience what it's like to be on the other side. How does that feel?

Bishops and Morality

Letter to the Editor

I find the idea of Catholic Bishops endorsing the idea that those who approve of abortion aren't fit to receive communion to be somewhat amusing. There's an old saying - those without sin should cast the first stone. And - even though no one really holds to those standards - I really think that the Bishops should focus on the issue of priests having sex with children before they represent themselves as being moral enough to give communion - let alone decide who should receive it.

-------

It's amazing the bishops who are against abortion yet silent on priests fucking children. I guess they haven't figured out that fucking children adds to the need for abortion.

The whole ritual of communion is rather bizzare when you think about it. The pedifiles have these crackers which they claim is "The Body of Christ" and you're supposed to eat this to get in heaven - and if you don't eat it - God will punish you and burn you in Hell forever. What scares the hell out of me is that there's people out there who actually believe this!

Church of Reality - Our Guide to War

I have written the Church of Reality's Guide to War. Unlike some might expect - the Church of Reality does not oppose all war. It does however oppose all unjust war and it requires every person to make a determination as to if the war is just or not. Our slogan is to think before you fight.

Realists are always the first ones on the battlefield. We are there before the war starts to make sure war never begins in the first place. Realists have won more wars than any other religion. But no one sings songs about the wars that never happened.

The Church of Reality is a religion based on believing in everything that is real.

Vatican endorses child rape

Letter to the Editor

I've always believed that it's not what you say that matters - it's what you do. Although the Catholic Church claims to be against priests raping children their actions tell a different tale. Archbishop Bernard Law who covered up the raping of children by priests in Boston has now been transfered to the Vatican. This sends a message that the Catholic Church is more interested in protecting the careers of the clergy that protecting Catholic children from being raped by priests.

Although the Church gives lip service saying that priests should not have sex with children - what they are doing speaks louder than what they are saying. So when the church says that some politicians aren't fit to take communion because of their stance on abortion - I say that the Catholic Church isn't fit to give communion based on their stance on allowing priests to have sex with children. Any religion that allows child rape has no moral authority to take a stand on anything.

If you're looking for a new religion try the Church of Reality - a religion based on believing in everything that's real.

Today is Easter

This is that day we celebrate because Jesus proved he was God by turning rabbits into chocolate.

Islam Sucks

Islam is a religion that totally sucks. I don't see any redeaming value in it at all. This is a religion that is based on violence and holy wars. They are a religion based on murder and terrorism. Any claim to the contrary is bullshit.

The word "assassin" comes from the Muslim faith. They use their children for bombs. The use their wives and sisters for bombs. They murder each other. Women are stoned to death for being raped. They teach their children to die as martyrs in their schools. Many countries don't allow women to read or drive cars. They are slaves and have no rights under the rules of the religion.

They would probably kill me for saying this if they had a chance. And - even though much of what Isreal is doing to Muslims because Jews are also a terrorist religion who freely kill non-jews - I just can't get real excited about defending Palistinians from Jewish oppression when they are a culture of violence themselves.

Question for those who support same sex marriage

Letter to the Editor

I have some questions for those who support same sex marriage - should I be allowed to marry my brother? If not - why not?

I would point out that the reason for not marrying my sister is that if we reproduced - then we would likely have birth complications. However - that doesn't apply if I marry my brother because I can't get him pregnant. For that matter - should I be allowed to marry my sister of one or both of us are not capable of reproducing? - If not - why not?

Should I be allowed to marry more than one person? Why limit marriage to only 2 people? Why not 3 or 4? Why have a limit?

Should I be allowed to marry my cat - especially when a cat is much more likely to make a lifelong commitment that a human. In fact - I would bet that if someone compared the average number of years an owner and their pet stay together and a man and wife stay together - the pets would win.

For those who want to move the line on what people should and shouldn't marry - where do you want to move the line to? And - why should the line be there?

----------------------------------

If it were up to me - I would move the line back the other way to include only couples with children. To me marriage is about families - reproducing - creating new generations. I would therefore - if I were King - grant civil unions to same sex couples and non-reproducing heterosexual couples.

All marriages are really civil unions in the eyes of the state because all states have no fault divorce laws. Therefore the state doesn't really recognize the "relationship" part of a marriage and marriage is really just a bad property agreement where if the relationship fails then two lawyers get to keep your property. From someone who has been chewed by the courts I say to same sex couples - be careful what you ask for - you might get it!

What About Same Sex Divorce?

There is a lot of talk about same sex marriage - but know one is talking about same sex divorce. What's going to happen when these people get tired of being married - then what. Do you just walk away and forget it? No - you're married.

The other side of getting the government to bless your marriage is that you have to go to the government to bless your divorce. And that involves giving everything you own to two crooked lawyers. I'm just waiting to see what happens when a man is ordered to pay allimony to another man who is curruently living with a third man. Welcome to the world of marriage boys!

Be careful what you ask for because you might get it. Out here in the hertero world - we've tried it and it sucks. No one in their right mind would get married if they really understood what they were agreeing to. If you think that the government enhances your relationship then you are full of the illusion - marriage in America and most of the world is a lie. There's no such thing as marriage because the government doesn't enforce the relationship commitment.

It used to be that a person had to have grounds for a divorce or it wasn't granted. The commitment was recognized by the state and it wasn't something you could walk away from when it became inconvienient. But now its just a property agreement - and a really bad one at that. So - once these gay couples are fully and equally married - then they will be able to appreciate the other side of the equasion - to be fully and equally divorced.

How many of these couples will get divorced? Well - among heterosexual marriages - you're looking at 50% to 60% divorce rate. And I'm guessing that the rate will be at least as high or higher for gay couples - taking into account that there are no biological children in the relationship to stay together for.

If it were up to me I would actually restrict marriage further rather than expand it. I would perhaps restrict it to reproducing couples - and - I would require a significant waiting period before a marriage license is granted. And - I would get rid of no fault divorce. Harder to get in - harder to get out. And both parties would have to file asset disclosurs and work out a prenup before they can get that government stamp on thier relationship.

One Nation Under God is a Religious Statement

I would like to make the arguments in the upcoming Supreme Court case of Unified School District v. Newdow but realistically I don't have the time and money to afford to file a brief. If I were to file - here's some of the arguments I would make.

The Pledge is a law. It is specified in federal code. It is an act of patriotism. "One Nation Under God" is a religious statement and with that statement there it marries patriotism with religion. It forces non-believers who whish to recite the pledge to make a religious affirmation that they don't believe in. The pledge is a statement of national identity. Its much more than a ceremonial or historic thing. It is more like an oath.

The Pledge is distinguished from other less important acts that include the mention of God. It is not merely ceremonial or historic. It is codified into federal law.

Lets look at mathematical sets. The big set is all people of all religions. This can be divided into to subsets - monotheists who believe in exactly one god - and everyone else who believe in multiple gods or no god. The argument is perhaps that there are so many monotheists that we can agree that this is a monotheistic country.

The flaw is that it excludes a class of people - non-monotheists. If it said "Under Jesus" or "Under Allah" or "Under Zeus" or "Under the Sacred Tree of Knowledge" then it would be more exclusive. They would argue that "Under God" is a sufficiently large subset to be close enough to be compliant. But because it is part of the phrase "One Nation - Under God" it ties our national identity to a religious affirmation.

Basically - to have "One Nation Under God" - in the context of the Pledge - is to have government make a determination that god exists. I would ask the court to be required to rule that god exists in order to include it in the Pledge. If the Pledge said "Under Peter Pan" then that would be right because Peter Pan is a fictional character and it would be wrong for the government to include a fictional character in the pledge laws.

God is a fiction character. He is no more real that Peter Pan. There is no logical difference between God and Peter Pan. Now - the court might not agree with that - but that brings up the real issue.

It is not up to the court or the government to determine if God exists. The first amendment prohibits the government from determining religious questions. Religious questions are for Religions to determine. It is up to Marc Perkel, Ferry Falwell, the Pope, the Dalai Lama, and individual citizens to decide that question. Judges and governments do not determine religious issues. It is not their place to do so. It is up to the people - not the government to decide whether or not to believe in God and that decision must be a separate act from pledging one allegiance to the nation.

The First Amendment of the Constitution "Establishment Clause" prohibits the government from establishing religion. Although the court recognized an exception for acts that have become the "fabric of society" in this case tying the pledge to a religious affirmation is designed to alter the fabric of society for the purpose of including government sponsored religious indoctrination to support infecting the fabric of society with the belief in the fictional character God. Including the phrase "One Nation Under God" establishes a government preference for monotheism over other religions.

Those who support the phrase "Under God" argue that is is a recognition of our national history, that the forefathers believed in God and referenced him in important documents. This is all part of the "fabric of society" argument that becuse we are all infected we should just accept the infection and declare we are a nation of people infected with a false belief and keep the infection in society.

As the founder of the Church of Reality I find this argument particulary offensive because the "fabric of society" argument basically say we are required to live the lie and to perpetuate the lie in the Tree of Knowledge. This precludes our Principle of Positive Evolution and the Principle of Bullshit and the very foundation of our church doctrine. To require our children to recite falsehood in order to make a patriotic statement is oppressive.

The Sacred Joke of the church of Reality

There are 10 kinds of people in the world - those who understand binary numbers - and those who don't.

(If you don't get it - do the research!)

The Principle of Curiosity, Exploration, and Imagination

New Sacred Principle of the Church of Reality

The Principle of Curiosity, Exploration, and Imagination is the quest for true knowledge. It represents our desire to move forward both individually and collectively. We are a curious church and we want to know how everything works. We want to explore the universe from galaxies to subatomic particles. We want to think about thinking, to understand understanding and to know reality as it really is.

We are people of vision. We dream of great things and actively move to make it happen. We are people who have the "Vision Thing" and who combine our wisdom and imagination with realistic thinking to lead the world to a better tomorrow.

---------

I'm now up to 16 Sacred Principles which is 10 in Hexadecimal!

Why Reality needs a Religion

Why the Church of Reality

Several people have asked me the question since I started the Church of Reality about why does Reality need a religion? What is the diffeerence between the Church of Reality and science? I'm also filling out my IRS 501c3 forms and having to answer that to the IRS. So ....

Here's why Reality should be a Religion.

Don't forget to donate.

EU Poll names ISRAEL top Threat to Peace

The right wing government again playing the Holocaust card as a defense to any criticism of the government as anti-semitism. But the reality is - the government of Israel really is one of the top threats to international peace. In my opinion, just behind the Bush administration who continues to masquerade as America ever since they stole the presidency in a judicial coup.

Here's what people don't get. There is a difference between the right wing Israeli government and Jews. Not the same thing. And - there is a difference between legitimate criticism and anti-semitism. If a Jew does something bad - and you call it bad - that's not anti-semitism. The government of Isreal is and evil bunch of mother fuckers and should be removed. When people like that are in power and work against peace - then you will find that eventually people figure it out.

Link to Original

Israel has been described as the top threat to world peace, ahead of North Korea, Afghanistan and Iran, by an unpublished European Commission poll of 7,500 Europeans, sparking an international row.

The survey, conducted in October, of 500 people from each of the EU's member nations included a list of 15 countries with the question, 'tell me if in your opinion it presents or not a threat to peace in the world'. Israel was reportedly picked by 59 per cent of those interviewed.

The leaking of the results of the poll to El Pais and the International Herald Tribune has sparked a bitter row, with a major Jewish human rights and lobbying group, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, demanding that the EU be excluded from the Israel-Palestinian peace process and accusing Europe of suffering the worst outbreak of 'anti-semitism' since World War Two.

The results appear to be a mark of the widespread disapproval in Europe of the tactics employed by the government of Ariel Sharon during the present intifada.

Israeli Ministers and spokesman have also been at pains recently to insist that a definition of modern 'anti-semitism' should include criticism of the way the state of Israel chooses to protect itself, defining that criticism as an overt attack on Israel's survival.

Bush claims God Chose him

Link to Full Article

President George W. Bush stood before a cheering crowd at a Dallas Christian youth centre last week, and told them about being 'born again' as a Christian.

'If you change their heart, then they change their behaviour. I know,' he said, referring to his own conversion, which led to him giving up drinking.

Behind Bush were two banners. 'King of Kings', proclaimed one. 'Lord of Lords', said the other. The symbolism of how fervent Christianity has become deeply entwined with the most powerful man on the planet could not have been stronger.

Few US Presidents have been as openly religious as Bush. Now a new book has lifted the lid on how deep those Christian convictions run. It will stir up controversy at a time when the administration is keen to portray its 'war on terror' as non-religious.

The book, which depicts a President who prays each day and believes he is on a direct mission from God, will give ammunition to critics who claim Bush's administration is heavily influenced by extremist Christians.

-- snip --

The book also shows that in the lead-up to announcing his candidacy for the presidency, Bush told a Texan evangelist that he had had a premonition of some form of national disaster happening.

Bush said to James Robinson: 'I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.'

-- snip --

Amazingly - when Bush became president - I and millions of other people also had a preminition of a national disaster happening. What an amazing coincidence!!

Did God want Bush to be president? hmmmmmm .... If he did - then this isn't a democracy and we don't really have free choice because God is working behind the seens to fix elections. I'm begining to wonder if God wrote the software for electronic voting machines because in places where the republican backed companies have installed their machines - miracles have happened where Republican's have unexpectedly won elections. And - as we know - only God can create miracles.

So - if God picked Bush then is God responsible for the results? Is God going to pay Bush's national debt? Is God going to create jobs?

The problem with God is that God just isn't very good with money. That's why God is always having to panhandle. Similarly, God picks people who are fiscally irresponsible. God doesn't do well picking presidents - if Bush's claim is true. Now God has us mired down in a religious war with Iraq leving us stuck with the results.

I say that if God wants to pick the president - then he should be required to at least register to vote.

Amen!

New Sacred Principle - Peace

I added a new sacred principle to the Sacred Principles of the Church of Reality. The Principle of Peace.

Although war can not always be avoided - there is no honor or victory in war. War always represents the failure to achieve peace and it is always something to be ashamed of. War is to be remembered from the perspective of failure and as a lesson to learn from to avoid war in the future. We in the Church or Reality understand - expecially in this day of nuclear and biological weapons - that peace is not something that is optional, and that we have a responsibility to our fellow human beings to do whatever it take to avoid war.

Bush sucks up to Israel - CNN

CNN gave Bush the Political Play of the Week for sucking up to the Jewish vote. It started when Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said, "The Europeans killed six million Jews out of twelve million, but today these Jews rule the world by proxy, "Mahathir said. "They get others to fight and die for them."

After 4 days of silence on the subject, according to CNN, Bush met with the prime minister "privately" (if it was private - then why do we all know about it?) denouncing his remarks about Jews "wrong and divisive."

According to CNN, "The White House made sure the president's private comments got plenty of attention."

CNN goes on to award Bush the Political Play of the Week stating:

Republicans see an opening with Jews.

"There is a big bid afoot in the Jewish community to make the case that President Bush is the best president for Israel ever," Kessler said.

The GOP saw a payoff in last year's midterm elections.

Nationwide, Jewish support for Republican House candidates had mostly been in the 30 percent range during the 1980s.

In the 90s, GOP support among Jewish voters fell.

Then suddenly last year, the Jewish Republican vote went back up to 35 percent.

Jews make up only 3 percent of voters nationwide. But, they are a major source of campaign money for Democrats.

Republicans are not as dependent on Jewish contributions. But they may have another motive. "It's about peeling off money that might go to the Democrats," Kessler said.

Especially now that Bush has spoken out against an outrageous, anti-Semitic slur.

"Whether you want to say he did it too late or he did not do it loud enough or whatever, he did it," concluded Kessler.

And it was the political Play of the Week.

-----

So - let me see if I understand this. Muslims accused Jews of ruling the world by proxy, and Bush gets political play of the week by showing Jews that he is willing to act as their proxy by denouncing the very statement that his own actions are proving to be true.

hmmmmmmmmm ......

I sure hope that Jews aren't foolish enough to buy this.

Furthermore - what Israel is doing to the Palistinians is wrong. I've given this a lot of thought and the excuse that "they did it to us first" or "they are more guilty" just doesn't cut it. Here's why:

First - let's assume the above two statement are true - so what? Israel is not just targeting enemy combatants. They are targeting innocent civilians who are just trying to live their lives in peace. They are knowingly killing innocent men, women, and children, bulldosing their homes, bulldozing their medical clinics, bulldosing their crops, all in order to terrorize them. Is there any chance that this behaviour will lead to peace? None! Will it make Israelies safer? Absolutely not! Is there any upside to Israel's behaviour that will help anyone on either side? No!

Therefore what the government of Israel is doing is wrong regardless of any other factors and it is the duty of the good peace loving people of the planet to resist this and say No to the right wing government of Israel. This is wrong and I speak out against it.

War and the slaughtering of innocent people is always a thing to be ashamed of. War is always a result of the failure of peace. And for those who would call my coments anti-semitic - well - I challenge you then to explain how what I say is worse for Jews than the actions of the Israeli government who is playing the Holocaust card as an excuse for murder and doing so in the name of Judiasm.

I ask you this question - are Jews a people of Peace or a people of War? Is it beyond the ability of Jews to live in peace with Palistinians? Or - is driving Pailistinians from their homes and killing innocent people the only solution? And - do you really think that you are the chosen people and that God supports this kind of behaviour? Well - if you do then God is pretty fucked up.

I'm not the one who's anti-semitic here - the right wing Israeli government is. Judiasm is a religion in denial - and it's time to wake up and join the real world!

Do Jews Rule the World?

Letter to the Editor

It an interesting question raised recently by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia. Do Jews rule the world? Or - more specifically - does the right wing Israeli government rule the world? Israel has been a militant obstacle to peace and is trying to use economic genocide to drive the Palestinians out of the area and steal their land. And - they are getting away with it. When I look at Israel's new "Berlin Wall" - it sends chills down my spine. Did the Jews learn nothing from the Holocaust?

Just as Tony Blair is Bush's poodle - it seems that Bush is the poodle of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. When Ariel Sharon says frog - Bush says how high. So - I think the President of Malaysia was on target with his remark and it's time the world woke up to the fact that the right wing governments of Israel, the United States, and England are in fact a threat to the peace and prosperity of the planet.

-----

What is control and how do you detect it. For instance - I am raising he question here about Jewish control and you are reading it. What is the first thing that comes to mind? Is this anti-sematism? And why does that come to mind? Well - because you can't say anything critical about the Jews or they play the holocaust card and make you a Nazi. Criticizing Jews is worse than talking sexual politics with militant lesbians. Not every critical remark about Jews is anti-jewish. And - in the long run - supressing critism results in prejudice. The Jewish religion and culture is no better than any other religion or culture except to the extent that they behave as better people. And what the Jews are doing in the Middle East does not reflect any sign of a superior culture.

The reality is - sometimes the Jews really are wrong. Sometimes the Jews really are the bad guys - and the right wing government of Israel really is a threat to peace on the planet and they really are pulling America's strings. This really is happening and we really do need to talk about it without the censorship.

The Jews are not God's chosen people and Israel was not given to the Jews by God. The Jews got Israel out of an act of compassion of the United Nations and they should thank the world community for their gift of land rather than to act like God gave them an entitlement.

Looking for Volunteers to Link to Reality

I'm looking for some volunteers to help spread the word about the Church of Reality on the Internet. I'd like to get as many links to it as possible. In order to do that I need people to go to related sites like lists of religions and suggest the Church of Reality.

Also - if you have a home page or have friends who have pages I'd appreciate a link. The more people link the more we will get noticed. Also - if any of you have pull with DMOZ or other search engines - could use some help there.

I still believe that if everyone in the world heard the name "Church of Reality" and had an idea that it was a church based on believing in what is real - that it would raise the IQ of the planet by 5 points.

You can be part of the process that brings humanity out of mythology and armegeddon and put it on the track of positive evolution. If you want a future brighter than today - then go out and spread the word. Tell people how reality changed your life!

Church of Reality has new Blog

I've started another blog on my Church of Reality site. The new blog can be found at: