CONCLUSION
 
The charge-sheet
 
Attempted murder – conspiracy to attempt murder
Conspiracy to attempt my mental and physical destruction
Conspiracy to overthrow democracy
Conspiracy to overthrow the rule of law
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
Giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the Queen
Causing grievous bodily harm
Suppressing material fact
Numerous offences against gender
 
‘The powers that be’
 
In front of the ‘cream of Londpn medicine’ my spinal fusion was repeatedly abused, such that I became crippled, while democracy, accountability, transparency were wholly disregarded.  .  No-one interfered.  No-one outside UCH interfered.  No-one got me out of there.  No-one offered me help or support of any kind, emotional, financial, political or practical.  Despite having been to both MI5 and the government about the grotesque corruption of medicine, I was simply left to rot.
Not only will no-one interfere with these creatures but it is evident their bottomless malice is to be sated, their displeasure must not be incurred by giving me any assistance. They are not to be incommoded in any way, for instance told to speak in public or save their breath or told to comply with the norms of free, democratic, rational and civilized societies.  The facts are to be suppressed not established in public. 
 
The Roman Catholic Church.
 
Insolently openly fascist organization, the basic positions of which are those of the Islamists.  These include sexual and religious supremacism and contempt for the sovereign liberty of the individual..
 
Whose total insanity is summed up by the statement you are evil if you do not believe what they say, if you reject believing that for which there is no evidence and fail to have Faith.
 
Same old pathetic ludicrous monkey words revealing everything: apostasy, I mean really what does this psycho piss-artist word mean, you were taught something as a child and you changed your mind.  Freedom of conscience means nothing to them.  But ooh, ooh, the Holy Catlick Church understands the gravity of the sin of apostasy so everyone else was supposed to take it seriously, that the Holy Catlick Church is an irrelevance in England
 
https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2020/05/christianity-is-a-relationship-not-a-set-of-rules-pope-says/
Then he’d better get the Catechism rewritten, fast.
 
Shall we just have all this again? 
CHAPTER THREE
MAN'S RESPONSE TO GOD
142 By his Revelation, "the invisible God, from the fullness of his love, addresses men as his friends, and moves among them, in order to invite and receive them into his own company."1 The adequate response to this invitation is faith.
143 By faith, man completely submits his intellect and his will to God.2 With his whole being man gives his assent to God the revealer. Sacred Scripture calls this human response to God, the author of revelation, "the obedience of faith".3
I. The Obedience of Faith
144 To obey (from the Latin ob-audire, to "hear or listen to") in faith is to submit freely to the word that has been heard, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself. Abraham is the model of such obedience offered us by Sacred Scripture. the Virgin Mary is its most perfect embodiment.
Catechism
 
 
"The Magisterium of the Church
85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48
87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.
100 The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him
Catechism of the Catholic Church

Wounds to unity
817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:
Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271
What is it, Blair?  Come on, what is it?  Rees-Mogg, Duncan Smith, Fitzalan-Howard, come on, come on, what is it?  It’s a blueprint for fascism.  It is everything at which the free world howled in outrage when represented by Hitler, Stalin, the cadres of North Korea.  Where the fuck do you dirty apes think the Nazis got it from?  This is an insolently fascist, insolently sexist, insolently homophobic institution which is raving mad because it believes it has Truth.  It has no place whatever in modern England. 
Fascism, insolent evident fascism right down to the hive mind called The Good. If you are a secular fascist, you are a pariah.  If you are a religious fascist, it is offence to offend you and an offence to discriminate against you.  Is there any politician so completely stupid that he or she does not think people have noticed that, that there is one law for the ‘devout’ and one for the rest of us, that we’re all supposed to be outraged not at fascism, not at evil, but at the fascist and evil being offended.
 
‘It has been revealed to us.’  What do these fucked-up baboons think we all are, do they really believe we’re all going to submit to the ravings of peasants and savages.
 
Specifically the teachings on human relations of these senile and perverted men are derived from a nasty little fairy-story in which a woman brought evil into man’s pure asexual relationship with God, love and sex evil distractions therefrom
 
Facts
We are being taken into Never-Never-Land where the most basic facts of political and intellectual history are ignored as though they never were: 'defamation' and derision of religion have been standard form for some 300 years from the Enlightenment through to Marx, Darwin and the counter-culture, and are the root of the free world. ‘They eat and drink, shit and piss their god,’ observed Voltaire (‘chient et pissent leur Dieu’, Dictionnaire philosophique: Transubstantiation, 1769) ‘Spiritual booze‘, ‘mediaeval mildew‘, opined Lenin (Socialism and Religion, 1905). People have not hesitated to say what they think, not what others have instructed them it is permissible to think and so established the foundations of the modern world, of science, of medicine, and of gender equality.
 
The hostility the Enlightenment evokes in certain orthodox religious is due to their loss of power. Instead of the self-appointed representatives of God set on high above us all to dictate what we may think, what we may do, how we may be, we became equal in rights. Power was transferred to the governed who gave power to the governing, who are equals, fellow, fallible human beings  accountable for how they exercise the power given them and can be dislodged and dismissed if they abuse it.

I own me. Who else can? Slavery has been abolished. I decide what I read. I decide what I think about it. I decide what I say or write, as I decide what I wear and with whom I shall make love.


The notion it is given people are in some sense property, tools of a greater purpose, whether God’s will or the demand of the State (in both cases of course what equally fallible fellow-humans have decided is God's will or the demand of the State) appears to be  gospel for something like 95% of the current 'Left'. Soviet Marxism adopted it lock, stock and barrel. To insist on being oneself not a creature of the will of others, thinking only what one’s masters permit, is evil/insanity. The wannabe overlord has a stock vocabulary - wilful, insolent, impudent, rebellious all terms which simply mean resistant to the wilful, insolent and impudent, if not rebellious, attempting to impose its will not only on other people but on reality itself, to define the mental world of all who surround it, to create a false reality and call it Truth.
 
You may wish to have a purpose to your existence, but it is not for others to say what you are for.  Once people are designated a purpose , if they fail to be fit-for-use they are expendable. Thus the Gulag Archipelago.

It is possible theoretically we are in some sense the property of God, but that does not make us the property of God's self-appointed representatives. This is a Protestant country; we sort ourselves out with God, should He, She or It exist.
 
The concept of God is not in itself a problem to anyone. We can argue until the end of the universe about whether God created quarks and it makes no difference to the even tenor of our lives.  The problem is those who insist the universe and its inhabitants are as described many centuries past by people who could not be talking out of the back of their heads because God spoke through them and so cannot be criticized, derided or indeed corrected.
 
The earth is not flat.  Most of us, whether theist or atheist, have moved on. 
 
There are many ‘abominations’ noted in Leviticus - God is not keen  on crustaceans, coneys or many other elements of his supposed creation. God Hates Shrimp is entertaining on this subject.  Clearly rabbit-pie is taboo and indeed swan.  Should someone tell the Queen, who is after all the head of the Church of England? To pick on just one ‘abomination’ and ignore the rest suggests a certain mental strangeness - what happened to ‘scriptural authority’? -
but it was only with the movements to ordain women that the full extent of the strangeness became apparent.  Clerical homophobia is more than some sexually confused old chaps clinging to Scripture to justify their confusion.  It seems sex and gender have cosmic significance., that the cosmos is rocked to its foundations by a female person representing Jesus.  How the sexual arrangements of an ape-descendant on the third rock from the sun comes to define the multiverse is not explained.
 
The stories a society tells itself are a mirror of how it sees itself and this society's block-buster record-breaker stories are not of 'up there' or 'down there' or even 20000 leagues under the sea, and only sometimes of 'over there', lost kingdoms where the hand of man has never set foot, Indiana Jones, for instance; overwhelmingly they are of of 'out there', Star Wars, Star Trek, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, ET, Avatar, Matrix, 2001: a space odyssey, Independence Day, Dr Who, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and the unforgettable Lost in Space.  ET is the highest grossing movie of all time. It supplanted Star Wars, the previous title holder.
 
The ultimate in how puny and insignificant are humans is not persons in church telling God how worthless they are in his sight, is not even having your planet demolished to make way for a hyperspace bypass, it’s the invisibly small dot constituting Earth on a map of the multiverse and multiverse theory while still theory is real not just Pratchett.
Rethinking the universe: Groundbreaking theory proposed in 1997 suggests a 'multiverse'
New physics complications lend support to multiverse hypothesis
 
This of course poses questions to clerics they may prefer not to answer, as indeed does the universe alone. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son to it?  What exactly do you mean by world?  Do you think that, if other worlds host sentient life, Jesus appeared there too? Is God just the God of this universe?  Are there equal Gods of other universes?
 
The image below is both the oldest and the youngest picture every taken.  It is the oldest because it has taken the light nearly 14 billion years to reach us. And it is the youngest because it is a snapshot of our newborn universe, long before the first stars and galaxies formed. The bright patterns show clumps of simple matter that will eventually form stars and galaxies. This is as far as we can see into the universe. It is time, not space, which limits our view. Beyond a certain distance, light hasn't had time to reach us yet.
How Big is our Universe
 
To take a trip through the visible universe and there are many excellent ones on the Web is (perhaps) to see the mind of God.  We don’t know.  We haven’t a clue. We make up our own minds.  
 
Until key religious figures come to terms with the the cosmos, with astrophysics, with quantum theory, until the language of multiverse theory is as familiar to them as New Testament Greek, they are not so to speak on the same planet as the rest of us.
 
The position apparently held almost universally across the so-called Left that one human being must curtail or deny the independent action of his or her heart and mind to accord with the beliefs of another human being on the grounds that the second person believes he expresses the Will of God cannot be sustained; to certain comrades slavery is fine, so long as no-one profits from it, ironic given that one of the few areas in which the record of the Left is unblemished is the fight against physical slavery and human trafficking. 
 
The reality of one’s fellow beings is that they are distinct, independent, starting from somewhere else.  They have their own thoughts and feelings, their own histories, their own lives.  They are not you.  They are not an extension of you.  They are not within your domain.  They are equal in rights.

We are no longer isolated hunter-gatherers in the year dot where any idea unfamiliar or distasteful to the devout is cause for apocalypse. This is England in the C21st. Millions of ideas circulate, not least those which have historically ended or curtailed the political power of religion and every version of every religion from the most blood and thunder to the most mystic.. No-one is going to like all of them.  No-one can like all of them.  People who strongly adhere to one view think people who strongly adhere to its opposite are talking nonsense and pernicious nonsense at that. We all have an equal right to speak. We all have to co-exist. We all have to accept we may come across that we find distasteful. Most of us do.

Objectors to Britain's embryo theocracy are many but splintered. We do not take tea in Downing Street. We remain unhugged by Livingstone. It seems the only elements heard are conservative bordering on neolithic.

The December 2004 YouGov poll found 35% of the nation to be atheist. The British Social Attitudes Survey released in 2011 showed 50% affiliating with a particular religion and 50% not. The 2001 Census identified 9 million with no religion (National Statistics Online – Religion in Britain), the 2011 Census, 14 million. 
 
On ‘Census Sunday’ in May 2005 6.3% of Britons attended a Christian church. The New Labour government hyped endlessly the 2001 Census finding that 71% of us identify ourselves as Christians. Whatever the respondents meant, clearly they did not mean formal observance.
 
By 2011, only 59% of us identified ourselves as Christian, not improbably due to a surfeit of dinosaurs.


A past golden age in which the whole of England was both devout and observant is itself a myth:
 
The Religious Census of 1851 demonstrated what Christians had long feared, that a large proportion of the population of England were neither Church people nor of any other religion. Although the exact figures must be treated with great caution, it seems clear that at least one-half of the people who might have been expected to go to church or chapel in 1851 did not do so. Most of the non-attenders came from the working classes...'the population having been till recently all but destitute of church ordinances, has relapsed into a state of semi-heathenism', wrote a vicar in a new parish near Oldham.
....
Queen Victoria...cared little for 'extreme views' in religion, and in teaching her children...chose to dwell not on 'the supernatural features of the Christian religion, but rather upon the pure and comprehensive morality which it teaches us as its essential and indestructible element;
Dickens's morality owed nothing to Evangelicalism or Tractarianism. Much religion, he suggested, was a 'vent for bad humours and arrogance' and there was no authority for the Murdstones in the New Testament; David Copperfield's opinion that 'we can all do some good if we will' was far more appealing. Dickens's obituary notes in Fraser's Magazine (July 1870) rightly seized on the point that 'he spent no thought on religious doctrines or religious reforms but regarded the Sermon on the Mount as good teaching, had a regard for the village church and churchyard, and quarrelled with nothing but intolerance'
Asa Briggs: The Age of Improvement
 
The original report of the 1851 Census reads as follows:
The most important fact which this investigation as to attendance brings Most important before us is, unquestionably, the alarming number of the non-attendants. Even fnquirj as to in the least unfavorable aspect of the figures just presented, and assuming (as attendance, no doubt is right) that the 5,288,294 absent every Sunday are not always the same individuals, it must be apparent that a sadly formidable portion of the English people are habitual neglecters of the public ordinances of religion. Nor is it difficult to indicate to what particular class of the community this portion in the main belongs. The middle classes have augmented rather than diminished that devotional sentiment and strictness of attention to religious services by which, for several centuries, they have so eminently been distinguished. With the upper classes, too, the subject of religion has obtained of late a marked degree of notice, and a regular church-attendance is now ranked amongst the recognized proprieties of life. It is to satisfy the wants of these two classes that the num ber of religious structures has of late years so increased. But while the labouring myriads of our country have been multiplying with our multiplied material prosperity, it cannot, it is feared, be stated that a corresponding increase has occurred in the attendance of this class in our religious edifices. More espe- cially in cities and large towns it is observable how absolutely insignificant a portion of the congregations is composed of artizans. They fill, perhaps, in youth, our National, British, and Sunday Schools, and there receive the elements of a religious education ; but, no sooner do they mingle in the active world of labour than, subjected to the constant action of opposing influences, they soon become as utter strangers to religious ordinances as the people of a heathen country. From whatever cause, in them or in the manner of their treatment by religious bodies, it is sadly certain that this vast, intelligent, and growingly important section of our countrymen is thoroughly estranged from our religious institutions in their present aspect. Probably, indeed, the pre valence of infidelity has been exaggerated, if the word be taken in its popular meaning, as implying some degree of intellectual effort and decision ; but, no doubt, a great extent of negative, inert indifference prevails, the practical effects of which are much the same. There is a sect, originated recently, adherents to a system called " Secularism " ; the principal tenet being that, as the fact of a future life is (in their view) at all events susceptible of some degree of doubt, while the fact and the necessities of a present life are matters of direct sensation, it is therefore prudent to attend exclusively to the concerns of that existence which is certain and immediate — not wasting energies required for present duties by a preparation for remote, and merely possible, contingencies. This is the creed which probably with most exactness indicates the faith which, virtually though not professedly, is entertained by the masses of our working population ; by the skilled and unskilled labourer alike — by hosts of minor shopkeepers and Sunday traders — and by miserable denizens of courts and crowded alleys. They are unconscious Secularists — engrossed by the demands, the trials, or the plea sures of the passing hour, and ignorant or careless of a future. These are never or but seldom seen in our religious congregations ; and the melancholy fact is thus impressed upon our notice that the classes Which are most in need of the restraints and consolations of religion are the classes which are most without them.
Census of Great Britain, 1851
 
If this is what New Labour hoped to rectify, they were about 150 years too late.

Tom Paine in The Age of Reason (1794) described Jesus as ‘a virtuous and amiable man’ who preached ‘most excellent morality…It is upon this plain narrative of facts…that the Christian mythologists, calling themselves the Christian church, have erected their fable, which for absurdity and extravagance is not to be exceeded by anything that is to be found in the mythology of the ancients.’

Many people of all faiths and none have engaged with the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. In the words of Jesus Christ Superstar, ’he’s a man, he’s just a man’, and engagement with him does not mean that we have the slightest interest in the notion that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son to it.
 
Voltaire too had no problem with Jesus. 
 
To this day the Catholic Catechism states
 
"The Magisterium of the Church
85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48
87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.
100 The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him
Catechism of the Catholic Church
 
In other words they are the only people who know what it means. It is not exactly surprising to the mostly normal that many disagree.
 
What Catholics, certainly in the West, think of this is not recorded, though one American Catholic journalist has mused, ‘They pretend to lead and we pretend to follow.’ Bill Keller’s article on the Vatican should probably be read by every politician in Europe.  The Vatican is a sovereign state, a law unto itself.  What it is not is the incredibly cool nun you met at a conference on ecumenism or the inner-city priest who advises contraception. The Reformation has been trivialized - if we can all agree on the nature of the Host then we can be one Church again.  It is not accidental the Reformation followed the invention of printing and so people starting to read the Bible for themselves; Protestants are supposed to read the Bible for themselves


Probably the biggest problem of organized Christianity, whether Catholic or Protestant, has always been Jesus himself and Christians saying, we don’t think he represents what you say he represents.
 
We are being fed a reduction of Christianity to fascism, the refusal to acknowledge the polarity in the thought of Christian nations between love and power,  the false identification of the enemies of the Church with the enemies of Jesus, the privileging of faith regardless of what that faith entails, contempt for unbelief, regardless of what that unbelief entails. Science and learning are as ever the enemies, for they take us beyond the arbitrary ceilings on thought of dogma to the world of physics and biology, to other readings of Jesus as a Kabbalist, a Sufi, Brahma, . If one does not live in the mental world of the 1st century AD (or indeed the 7th), if one does not submit to such a world, one is flawed and insensitive; if one does, one is blessed, a superior form of life. Just obey.

Paine also wrote: 'My own mind is my own church.'

I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.

I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.

But, lest it should be supposed that I believe in many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

British citizens have gone in the direction of Tom Paine. British politicians are headed off in the opposite direction, courting figures from religious establishments who by definition adhere to a dead orthodoxy, about which no-one besides fellow-dinosaurs gives a damn.

The precise crime of the philosophes was not atheism but thought, pitting one’s puny human reason against revelation, as deliciously expounded in this passage entitled The Master Plan of the Devil
 
For approximately seventeen centuries men acknowledged that authority comes only from God, and temporal rulers sought the approval and the blessing of their bishops who, by divine right, ruled in their dioceses as successors of the Apostles. Then came the Philosophists. As always, the Power of Darkness used pride to achieve his aims, the pride of human reason. As always he called the Light, Darkness and the Darkness, Light (Isaiah 5:20). That is why the Medieval times are now referred to as the "Dark Ages"; (in fact, the Dark Ages were pre-Medieval), and why Philosophism is referred to as "Enlightenment". ...When the first battle had been won, the Devil moved from the religious field into the philosophical field, and conceived Rationalism, which put human reason before Revelation.

In other words, in place of ‘I know that’ and ‘it is good that’ came, ‘you know nothing of the kind’ and ‘it’s a lot of twisted nonsense that’. Thus Voltaire in his article on atheism in the Dictionnaire philosophique:

Men fattened by our wealth shout, "Believe that an ass spoke, believe that a fish swallowed a man and spat him out good as new onto the shore three days later. Do not doubt that the God of the universe commanded a Jewish prophet to eat shit (Ezekiel) and another prophet to buy two sluts and make whores of them (these are the very words they make the God of truth and purity speak), believe a hundred things either evidently repulsive or mathematically impossible. If you don't, the God of mercy will burn you not just for hundreds of thousands of years but for the whole of eternity, whether you have a body or not.

These preposterous imbecilities repel equally the weak-minded and foolhardy and the strong and wise. They say: "Our masters depict God as the most deranged and barbaric of beings, therefore there is no God", but they ought to say, 'Our masters attribute to God their own absurdities and their own rage, therefore God is the opposite of what they say, as wise and good and they say he is mad and bad." Thus speak the wise. But if a fanatic overhears them, he denounces them to the magistrate who puts them to torture, believing he avenges and impersonates the divine majesty he outrages.

(My translation)   Full English text here et en français
 
Plus ça change...

During the French Revolution Notre-Dame de Paris was looted, vandalized and for a time turned into a ‘Temple to Reason’ with a statue of Lady Liberty on the altar.  Of course no-one has ever previously become a little cross with the Church.
 
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1997):


2087 Our moral life has its source in faith in God who reveals his love to us. St. Paul speaks of the "obedience of faith"9 as our first obligation. He shows that "ignorance of God" is the principle and explanation of all moral deviations.10
 
From the inauguration of Cardinal Nichols:
At the installation of the Most Rev Vincent Nichols at Westminster Cathedral, his predecessor, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, described a lack of faith as “the greatest of evils” and blamed atheism for war and destruction, implying that it was a greater evil even than sin itself.....
 
In his homily he said: “Faith in God is not, as some would portray it today, a narrowing of the human mind or spirit. It is precisely the opposite. “Faith in God is the gift that takes us beyond our limited self, with all its incessant demands . . . Some today propose that faith and reason are crudely opposed, with the fervour of faith replacing good reason. This reduction of both faith and reason inhibits not only our search for truth but also the possibility of real dialogue.”
Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor went farther. Referring to the battles that will be won and lost in the effort to sustain the Christian presence in secular society, he said: “What is most crucial is the prayer that we express every day in the Our Father, when we say ‘deliver us from evil’. The evil we ask to be delivered from is not essentially the evil of sin, though that is clear, but in the mind of Jesus it is more importantly a loss of faith. For Jesus, the inability to believe in God and to live by faith is the greatest of evils.
“You see the things that result from this are an affront to human dignity, destruction of trust between peoples, the rule of egoism and the loss of peace. One can never have true justice, true peace, if God becomes meaningless to people.”
From The Times, 22nd May 2009, now behind a paywall
 
To the harmless civilized atheist of course belief in God may seem the principle and explanation of all moral deviations; to many, whether Christian or not, it would seem that on the contrary faith may underpin the clamourings of the limited self, claiming the forcing of its incontinent urges on others has divine sanction; it is love that takes us beyond them. 
 
A modest Christian education recalls 1 Corinthians:
 
1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
 
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
 
Perhaps at a later date Their Eminences might take this up with Paul, that same Paul?
 
Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself
 
Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
 
Mark 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these
 
Or possibly with Jesus.
 
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."11
Hope
2090 When God reveals Himself and calls him, man cannot fully respond to the divine love by his own powers. He must hope that God will give him the capacity to love Him in return and to act in conformity with the commandments of charity. Hope is the confident expectation of divine blessing and the beatific vision of God; it is also the fear of offending God's love and of incurring punishment.
2091The first commandment is also concerned with sins against hope, namely, despair and presumption:
By despair, man ceases to hope for his personal salvation from God, for help in attaining it or for the forgiveness of his sins. Despair is contrary to God's goodness, to his justice - for the Lord is faithful to his promises - and to his mercy.
2092 There are two kinds of presumption. Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high), or he presumes upon God's almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
 
The limitations of reason within any given frame of reference are equally apparent.  Certainly reason may be utilized to demonsrate the workings of the Trinity or how the withering away of the state follows from the dictatorship of the proletariat, but the bars of the cage cannot be questioned.  It is of course explicit in the concept of revelation that there is that which reason may not touch.
 
So far as Search is infallible, the words ‘physics’ and ‘biology’ do not appear anywhere in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, ‘evolution’ only once and in a general not a scientific sense (‘the evolution of the liturgy’).
 
It does, however, say this:
 
The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: "It is he who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements. . . for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me."121
284 The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin: is the universe governed by chance, blind fate, anonymous necessity, or by a transcendent, intelligent and good Being called "God"? And if the world does come from God's wisdom and goodness, why is there evil? Where does it come from? Who is responsible for it? Is there any liberation from it?
285 Since the beginning the Christian faith has been challenged by responses to the question of origins that differ from its own. Ancient religions and cultures produced many myths concerning origins. Some philosophers have said that everything is God, that the world is God, or that the development of the world is the development of God (Pantheism). Others have said that the world is a necessary emanation arising from God and returning to him. Still others have affirmed the existence of two eternal principles, Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, locked, in permanent conflict (Dualism, Manichaeism). According to some of these conceptions, the world (at least the physical world) is evil, the product of a fall, and is thus to be rejected or left behind (Gnosticism). Some admit that the world was made by God, but as by a watch-maker who, once he has made a watch, abandons it to itself (Deism). Finally, others reject any transcendent origin for the world, but see it as merely the interplay of matter that has always existed (Materialism). All these attempts bear witness to the permanence and universality of the question of origins. This inquiry is distinctively human.


286 Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a response to the question of origins. The existence of God the Creator can be known with certainty through his works, by the light of human reason,122 even if this knowledge is often obscured and disfigured by error. This is why faith comes to confirm and enlighten reason in the correct understanding of this truth: "By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear."123
 
The bars of the mental cage are clearly delineated.  Naturally they uphold their own beliefs, as would believers in any closed system, Marxist or Muslim. The problem is the chasm between them and those of us with open minds who might say, “Indeed my knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos has been most splendidly enriched but I see no reason why your version of the frame of reference in which these things exist should be more real, more true, morally sounder, or in any other way superior.”  Like elements in Islam, which whatever its problems perhaps is fortunate in not having a similar central authority, they simply do not understand the open society and the free market in ideas, how inadequate it is to say one must have faith, how really rather sad it is to say that absence of faith is the greatest of evils, and so do not understand human liberty.
 
We want to talk about love and death and reality and illusion, time and timelessness, fear and love, self and other, about life the universe and everything in the terms these things actually exist, the terms of physics and biology, not the terms set by desert tribesmen, about the principles that inform the human condition, of course we want to talk about the human condition, thinking life always has and always will, and we'll take ideas from anywhere on the planet, and they want to talk about how women priests offend God. God wants your meat killed in a certain way, is obsessed with what you wear and even more obsessed with what you do in bed and with whom, and what we really need to do is just believe in them.
 
There are many, many concepts of God. The one most prominently displayed today is God the Fascist. As even a cursory glance at history tells us, religious people display the same gamut of behaviour from good to evil as the non-religious both upholding and opposing everything from the slave-trade to women's rights.

Again the Catechism:


Wounds to unity
817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

The Church holds we are helpless without God. We cannot do good without God and so without something entering us from outside. There is no mechanism inside people capable of moral choice. What the rest of us would regard as a natural plurality of perspectives is a wound to unity.

The core of it remains that independent mental activity is considered synonymous with self, to assert the existence of a functioning mind as heart, to have one’s own views not those dictated by another, supposedly speaking on behalf of the God person, to be human, is self-will and rebellion. The Vatican, which thinks to represent Europe, does not and cannot represent the free world, not least because of its views on other religions, and far from maintaining a Christian presence in non-Catholic Europe probably acts as a major force for alienation.  Key facts about modern Europe include the Reformation and the collapse of the Soviet bloc culminating in the fall of the Berlin Wall and the unification of Germany in 1990.  A little arithmetic will tell you that anyone over 40 born in the former Soviet empire was educated by Soviet Communism.  Poland has largely returned to the Church.  Former East Germany has not. 
 
Whether or not we leave the EU, France, Germany and Great Britain have in common remarkably similar figures for religious adherence or lack of.  In answer to the question, “What, if any,  is your religion or faith, even if you are not practising?” 45% in France, 50% in Germany and 53% in Great Britain affiliated themselves with Christianity, 35% in France, 38% in Germany and 37% in Great Britain said they had no religion at all
IPSOS Mori poll, 2011, page 41
 
This is not fertile soil for a religious renaissance and rather more a blueprint for potential cataclysm and indeed Europe has already been once rent in twain by religion.  Preferable, I should think, that it does not reoccur.
 
...it is through having thought, that Sweden, Denmark, all your island, and the half of Germany groan under the frightful misfortune of not being subjects of the pope. It is even said that, if men continue to follow their false lights, they will soon have merely the simple adoration of God and of virtue. If the gates of hell ever prevail so far, what will become of the holy office?
Voltaire: Dictionnaire philosophique - Freedom of Thought
 
The political power of the Vatican in England was finally - I trust - ended in 1688 by the Glorious Revolution.
 
The Vatican is not the sole custodian of western civilization.  Such civilization as the West possesses comes from Athens and Nazareth, love and mind.  There have been for many centuries and still are many people who doubt the Vatican Jesus’ true representative. Five centuries before the birth of Jesus, if indeed he was historically real, was Classical Athens, flawed of course, but representing the questioning mind, the birth of philosophy, art, literature, mathematics, the beginnings of science, the kernel of democracy.
 
Greece in all her aspects is threatening to the men of the Abrahamic faiths who attempt to dominate the political sphere.  Real Greek women certainly led constrained lives but the goddesses did not and represented remarkable potential role-models.  Given that it took most of 2000 years for Christendom to fully accept female possibility (mostly), it is probably not too much to suggest that, had the early Church run off with Athens instead of remaining tied to the Old Testament, a combination of remorseless Greek reason, role-models and insistence on loving one’s neighbour as oneself could have breached that particular citadel somewhat sooner. 
 
Mediaeval Islamic scholars discovered Greece nearly a thousand years ago.  I think it may be possible to say that the essential difference between the West and the Muslim world is that the West found it impossible to lose Greece and Islam didn't. 
 
...For if it is difficult or rather impossible for one person to acquaint himself single-handed with all things which it is necessary to know in legal matters, it is still more difficult in the case of philosophical reasoning. And, if before us, somebody has enquired into it, we should derive help from what he has said. It is quite immaterial whether that man is our co-religionist or not; for the instrument by which purification is perfected is not made uncertain in its usefulness by its being in the hands of one of our own party, or of a foreigner, if it possesses the attributes of truth. By these latter we mean those Ancients who investigated these things before the advent of Islam.
Now, such is the case. All that is wanted in an enquiry into philosophical reasoning has already been perfectly examined by the Ancients. All that is required of us is that we should go back to their books and see what they have said in this connection. If all that they say be true, we should accept it and if there be something wrong, we should be warned by it. Thus, when we have finished this kind of research we shall have acquired instruments by which we can observe the universe, and consider its general character. For so long as one does not know its general character one cannot know the created, and so long as he does not know the created, he cannot know its nature
On the Harmony of Religions and Philosophy, Ibn Rushd (Averroës), 1126-1198 CE:
 
Islam, like Christianity, is multi-faceted. A quick Google of Islamic art, a visit to the Sufi Cookbook or reading the Sufi poets paints a markedly different picture to that we are being force-fed,.  Islam did not become a world-power by just being a bunch of hectic little men waving swords around
 
Consequent upon the enthusiastic propagation of frank lies concerning the intellectual and political history of the West, the notion has been left free to flourish that criticism and derision of Islam ‘must be’ racism, that people feel to criticize and deride Islam only because many of its adherents are brown and would not dare similarly criticize and deride Christianity, when reality is rather that, after centuries of being kicked into line, orthodox Christianity is on the whole less ghastly and so less inviting of derision than orthodox Islam, though if you are a gay Catholic or a Greek Orthodox woman who wants to be a priest, you may disagree.
 
Of those for whom the earth is flat, a proportion are fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic, perspectives on which this society has turned its back - apparently not if someone’s God dictates otherwise.  Of course people can be fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic without a religious bone in their bodies, but - equally of course - such people are roundly condemned.  We live in interesting times.
 
Crushed between Greece and Jesus the Old Testament fought valiantly to survive and lost.  It is sometimes said that the reason the West dislikes Islam is that it's foreign - you know, like Buddha and the Maharishi and for that matter Rumi.  The truth is rather that that good ole time hellfire religion is all too familiar.  The OT has been decisively rejected, not least of course by Jesus: stoning women is not some uniquely Islamic barbarism.  Deuteronomy 22:21 is explicit on the subject..  For certain the only reason Christian zealots have not stoned adulteresses is John 8:1-11
 
More broadly, ‘He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her’ has constrained the rabid in circumstances other than the literal. 
 
We may note in passing that ‘the woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.’ (Deuteronomy 22:5)
 
Ah well, that’s 98% or so of western women down the tubes.
 
It may reasonably be said of the C21st that we don’t want to know, we don’t want to know about the Vatican’s sexual phobias, we don’t want to know about Allah’s wrath, we don’t want to know about a Jewish creation myth.  We are being put in a position where we are supposed not only to want to know but to treat such drivel with deference.  It should not be necessary to place statues of Liberty on the altars of Westminster Abbey to terminate this.
The growth of secularism in the UK is unabated with fresh data showing stark generational differences and a new confidence among the non-religious to declare themselves atheist.
Only 1% of people aged 18-24 identify as Church of England, according to the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey for 2018. Even among over-75s, the most religious age group, only one in three people describe themselves as C of E.

Across all age groups, the younger people are the less likely they are to call themselves Anglican.
The steady decline in religious belief among the British public is “one of the most important trends in postwar history”, says the BSA report.
Fifty-two percent of the public say they do not belong to any religion, compared with 31% in 1983 when the BSA survey began tracking religious belief. The number of people identifying as Christian has fallen from 66% to 38% over the same period.
“Britain is becoming more secular not because adults are losing their religion but because older people with an attachment to the C of E and other Christian denominations are gradually being replaced in the population by younger unaffiliated people,” says the report.
“To put it another way, religious decline in Britain is generational; people tend to be less religious than their parents, and on average their children are even less religious than they are.”
Non-religious parents successfully transmit their lack of faith to their children, but two religious parents have only a 50/50 chance of passing on their faith, the report says.

The non-religious are increasingly atheist. One in four members of the public stated: “I do not believe in God,” compared with one in 10 in 1998. The figures challenge theories that people are “believing but not belonging” – in other words, that faith has become private rather than institutional – the report says.
The proportion of people who say they are “very or extremely non-religious” has more than doubled, from 14% to 33% in the past two decades.
Nevertheless, most people are tolerant of others’ religious beliefs. A large majority of both non-believers and people of faith have positive or neutral views of individuals who belong to a religion.
Advertisement
Only 3% of people say they would definitely not accept a mixed-faith marriage within their family, with 82% saying they would definitely or probably accept someone from a different religion marrying a relative.
As religious adherence declines, trust in scientific institutions is increasing, says the report. University scientists have a higher trust rating (82%) than corporate scientists (67%).
In terms of confidence in institutions, 11% of people say they trust churches and religious organisations, compared with 36% who have confidence in the education system, 34% in the legal system, 16% in business and industry and 8% in parliament.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/11/uk-secularism-on-rise-as-more-than-half-say-they-have-no-religion
The facts are, tedious and boring though it is, the facts. I am who I say I am, related and otherwise connected to those to whom I say I am, with a medical history that is as I say it is and a CV that contains what I say it contains.There was a era in history called the Enlightenment. There is a body of thought called Marxism. There was an English Civil War. There was a revolution in France which began in 1789 and an American Declaration of Independence.There was even a revolution in Russia. That there are many many bodies of thought in the world, the contents of some of which are directly opposite to the contents of others, is also fact. That people disseminate ideas in books is fact, as are the invention of printing and the institution of compulsory education, enabling people in the free world to imbibe a variety of ideas.I have discoursed largely upon reality, about those things which can't be changed, among which of course is me. There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop me being the daughter of Barrington Stockwell Howard and Kathleen Constance Palmer. They cannot make it that I did not graduate from Bedford College, University of London. They cannot make Bedford other than it was. There is a street-lamp outside my window. Certainly it can be removed but it cannot cease to exist because someone insists it isn't there. What has happened has happened. You can wish it hadn't happened. You can seek its causes. You can work towards its not being repeated. You cannot alter the fact of its having happened You can of course also feel bloody pissed-off with those who insist a bad thing is good.I am of course an inner and eso kind of gal, in fact most precisely, like Dill, I combine my father's rationalism with a profound esotericism; equally of course I am human and living in the world, in consequence of which I have - explored my outer and exo aspects, aka my politics, my heritage. I was content to express my exoteric through long walks in touch with nature and through creative writing. Naturally everyone has views but mine are rather unexceptionable among normal civilized educated people. I ceased to be among such people and indeed the country ceased to be governed by such people. The lunatics have taken over the asylum. Surrounded by Newspeak, oh indeed telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. It happens that I am the product of four revolutions,, Marxism, the Enlightenment,feminism and the discovery of Eastern religion and spirituality in the Sixties, and of course I am a product of Anglican England. Unfortunately I'm not gay; if I were I should embody everything the Vatican hates. Four out of five is pretty good.
http://www.dillsplace.com/exo-eso-balance-balrogs-et-le-parti-communiste-francais-1939-1945.html
 
So: you can infuriate and indeed distress me beyond belief; you can create an infrastructure composed of gross lies; you have of course, being the beyond pathetic filthy animals you are, wrought physical changes to my body – indeed your method of fighting shows beyond doubt what trash you are, mindless vermin who think they convince me of anything by assaulting me.  But you cannot change a single external verifiable fact.
Yea, the Moving Finger writes and having writ…Nor all your  Piety not your wit because you have none can cancel out a word of it.
 
You cannot counter me with argument because your logic is flawed and your so-called facts are lies.  Therefore you conduct yourselves as the mad ape has conducted itself throughout history.  But you have not changed and cannot change a single external verifiable fact.
 
History has overthrown you and it is of course grotesque, evil, treason, beyond obscene, etc, etc, etc, that you should have been given free rein to break my body and derail my life.  And you caper in triumph but you have not changed and cannot change a single external verifiable fact.  You alter nothing, neither the solstice gatherings at Stonehenge, nor the success of Led Zep, nor the numerous pagan, secularist and humanist gatherings held in Brighton.  You do not for that matter alter that when my mum was 7, which was 1927, she was given a book called Gods and Heroes full of Greek and  Roman myths (cleaned up) as a prize for something or other; you do not alter that anyone not wholly at ease with the gods and goddesses of the classical world, part of the mental furniture, is a total loon.  You could start with the C17th French playwrights Racine and Corneille, who made their living rendering classical stories in alexandrins.  You do not for that matter  eliminate Cream’s Tales of Brave Ulysses or The Herd’s From the Underworld.You do not make cease to exist the Brighton Buddhist Centre or the weekly Tai Chi in the Park session or the Brighton Naturist Beach.  You do not eradicate millions of people who happily have sexual relations without the need of marriage and do not possess your grotesque primitive neuroses about virginity and millions more who do not possess your  grotesque primitive neuroses concerning the human body.  Yup, it’s where ‘I’ lives.  I used to be quite proud of it, but it’s a bit ravaged now.  The stuff on the outside is called skin.  Everyone has it.  There are three reasons for covering it up: skin cancer in summer, frostbite in winter and it’s reached the stage where it’s not pretty.  Think I’ll give that naturist beach a miss.  .
 
Brighton Buddhist Centre has had a presence in the city for over 40 years
We believe that Buddhism and Meditation has a great deal to offer.
For people who want to change themselves, and the world.
That's why we are still here.
We offer Meditation classes, Meditation and Buddhism courses, Yoga Classes, Yoga + Meditation,Tai Chi
Mindfulness Courses (MBCT) and Mindfulness for living well with pain and illness,
and a lot more, see below
 
I’ve actually seriously only just found this.  Think I might drop in.
 
You do not of course eradicate millions of books and Webpages and libraries containing matter offensive to or hostile to your ridiculous beliefs, by no means least acres of science.
 
It would seem to me that you honed in on me as a freak because you are some kind of psychiatric case who lives in a hole in the ground and had never previously come across someone like me. You then managed to convince others that I was some kind of freak and of course others have their own agendas for wishing my destruction, not least hatred of my dissecting intelligence, which is not of course to be permitted in a female body.
 
You cannot eradicate the human mind, questioning intelligence, though of course your filthy kind, from the Inquisition to the gulags to the Killing Fields has never done anything else.  Good to know Labour are fully on the case for you, second to none in their enthusiasm for the destruction of human intelligence, with no sign of let-up any time soon.   I understand perfectly that the intelligent are hunted.  We offend morons like you.  Morons do not exist in the Labour lexicon, especially not if they wear green robes, turbans, black robes or surplices, cloaks and neckbands, and you are of course essentially stupid.
 
This stupid:
There’s something it’s quite important you filthy animals all understand.  You won’t of course, but shall I try one more time.  You change nothing.  You do not make yourself more intelligent, more informed, more literate, more rational by ample demonstration you are not intelligent, informed, literate or rational.  You could make yourself more informed literate and rational by study, by application.  You could indeed make yourself more intelligent, to the extent that intelligence is bound up with literacy and the capacity to understand words and rationality and the capacity to grasp reason.  Behaving like a wordless mindless butcher does not stop you being a wordless mindless butcher.   
When all the people who note you are a wordless mindless butcher are prone and bloodied at your feet, you alone left standing, you are still a wordless mindless butcher, stupid, ignorant, irrational, illiterate. 
You do not change a single thing about me.  You do not stop me being the daughter of Barrington Stockwell Howard and all the rest of it.  You do not change my having graduated from the University of London and qualified for membership of British Mensa.  You do not erase from my mind all knowledge and experience.  You do not eliminate communities of pagans, secularists, atheists, naturists, Buddhists, humanists here in Brighton as throughout England. 
You do not change the millions of books on goddesses and alternative belief-systems as on quantum physics and mathematics, on geology, on natural history indeed available to the entire world on Amazon. 
Shall we talk for a minute about Kindle Unlimited.  Kindle Unlimited is Kindle’s lending library.  You have heard of Kindle, I take it, Blair.  It’s the ebook part of Amazon and indeed many ebooks are cheaper than their dead tree copies.  For £7.99 a month you can subscribe to Kindle Unlimited, which means you can borrow up to ten  books at a time, return them, borrow ten more.  You will see that a fast reader can get through 20 books a month for 7.99 or call it 40p each, which is pretty good, and these books are on many subjects, some fact, some fiction, so whatever piques your interest can be freely explored.  (Am I explaining the world the mostly normal live in to the political classes?  Probably.)   
So you can read books on a variety of subjects for very little, which of course you can equally do if you have the time and the legs to haunt charity shops, of which there are a huge number.   
Similarly, there is something called YouTube.  In common with the rest of the Internet there is a huge lot of crap on it, but there is equally a huge amount of non-crap.  There you will find music of all kinds from all over the world.  You will also find physics, maths, cosmology, chemistry, natural history, enthusiasts of all kinds sharing their knowledge. 
Millions of people view these vids.  That is of course millions of people worldwide. 
You do not eliminate the thousands, millions of explanations of the world from the most to the least scientific that are not your own. 
You remain a ludicrous futile, ridiculous, absurd, sick, vicious, snarling and pathetic animal.  The longer you continue this, the more you prove you are a ludicrous futile ridiculous, absurd sick vicious snarling and  pathetic animal: a joke. 
And so it is evident that across the political spectrum to be a ludicrous futile ridiculous absurd sick and pathetic animal is to the way to go, what is prized, whatever layers of puke they attempt to conceal it with.  The futile vicious animal is to remain unperturbed, no demands to be made of it.  The futile vicious animal is to rule.  Their chief weapon of course is absolute psychosis and ignorance, the animal is to assume it is complete and perfect.  On no account is it to become possessed of curiosity and want to learn about the diverse and buzzing world around it.   
However, automation means the futile vicious and ridiculous animal is about to become surplus to requirements.  Presumably those who demand unlimited immigration think everyone in the world should have the opportunity to lie around naked on Brighton’s naturist beach because there won’t be anything else for them to do.   
DIY your Will, DIY your tax-returns.  Print a new sofa.  All the time worn phrases of parents encouraging their offspring into safe professions no longer hold.  Always work for doctors, always work for lawyers, always work for accountants, nope.  All over the Internet people are addressing the same brick wall.   
Labour of course still lives in the world of Lowry, the legions of noble workers trudging up to the factory-gate.  As do the master sheep-shearers, all the jolly fresh-faced little underlings dead from the neck up shall toil away doing their will.   
Shall we talk about Kindle and YouTube.  That's apart from the millions of specialist sites on everything from British butterflies to Niels Bohr and Max Born, Byron and Buddha.  OK, you type 'quantum physics' into YouTube search.  You get a huge number of results.  It doesn't stop there.  You type 'quantum physics in Arabic' or 'quantum physics in German' and you get a huge number of expositions in Arabic or German.  Or you can type 'quantenphysik' or whatever the Arabic is for quantum physics.  YouTube is not monolingual.   Or you can just type 'string theory' into Kindle search and get 932 books to read.   Provided people 1) can read, 2) have internet access and 3) are not hampered by their fucktard governments limiting their internet access, the whole world has access to limitless information on anything anyone wishes to instruct himself or herself about, a great deal of it for free.  Project Gutenberg offers 57000 free ebooks: 'You will find the world's great literature here, with focus on older works for which copyright has expired. ' 
Then there are the free courses offered by serious institutions.  At Coursera you can do Data Science from John Hopkins or if you prefer the University of Edinburgh will introduce you to philosophy or the Shanghai Jiao Tong University will teach you Mandarin, Duke will teach you neuroscience and that's not all in English either: .Генетика (Genetics).  Harvard offers its own range of free online courses. 
 
“The idea is simple: to publish all of our course materials online and make them widely available to everyone.” 
Dick K.P. Yue, Professor, MIT School of Engineering   Unlocking Knowledge MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) is a web-based publication of virtually all MIT course content. OCW is open and available to the world and is a permanent MIT activity. View a list of our most visited courses    
People with no more chance of attending MIT in person than they have of flying to the moon are effectively studying there. 
 
All over the world people are learning things that 30 years ago money or geography meant they hadn't a hope in hell of reaching. 
 
And Her Majesty's Government thinks people shouldn't think in case they upset nutters who live in some sort of time-space bubble cut off from the world.  What sort of message do you think you send to kids in Pakistan or Dubai who would actually quite like to wave the religion of the mad bye-bye?   But then of course it is remarkably unclear to me in what bubble HMG resides; it certainly doesn't reside in modern England.'I look for truth and find that I get damned.'  I could say that, yes, except it's insane.  What is this fucking crap?  This is not C1st Gallilee, a Jewish colony of the Roman Empire.  It is England in the C21st.  Of course I look for truth, it's a very commonplace preoccupation of sentient life.  People do not normally rise from the dead.  Perhaps you have noticed this simple fact?  Of course I think the Creation is crap.  It's only 158 years since On the Origin of Species, and barely less since the birth of genetics, Mendel ironically an Augustinian monk.  On the Origin of Species proved unexpectedly popular, with the entire stock of 1,250 copies oversubscribed when it went on sale to booksellers on 22 November 1859. 
The link with human origins was not initially explicit but rapidly became so, and no, May, Javid, Hammond and all the rest of you freaks, Darwin was not surrounded by mobs with firebrands, Huxley was not prosecuted for disparaging religious doctrine.  Bishops were once capable of communicating with educated life in terms more elevated than 'you don't believe what we say so you're evil'. 
 
 
Reason
 
Perhaps in five year old English

[I may add to, subtract from or edit this at a later date.  Or I may not.]

Perhaps if I put it in 5-year-old English.
I am not you.  We are agreed so far?  I am here and you are wherever you are.

There is only what is. 

What is may be pretty basic.  Fred said to Joe, “I’m buying the next round.”

Anyone who heard Fred say that to Joe and denies it is lying.

A lie is a false reality, a statement something is true that is not true, leading people to believe it is true and think and act in accordance with its being true.

Conveying a false reality is not necessarily a deliberate attempt to mislead.  Nonetheless, a false reality is something that pisses people off, be it ever so minor. Due to simple cock-up,  a delivery  promised for Tuesday, as a result of which you stayed in/took time off work, does not appear.

A belief system is a series of propositions abut the universe and its inhabitants, put into a box labelled ‘Marxism’, ‘Anglicanism’, ‘Sikhi’, ‘Buddhism’, whatever. 

There are generally some propositions you have to accept to belong in the box.  If you do not accept them you live in another box.  For example, Unitarians believe in God and Jesus, but do not believe Jesus was God incarnate, thus denying the Trinity. 

Broadly every individual on the planet thinks what he or she believes is true, because he/she wouldn’t believe it if he/she didn’t think it was true, or at least half-believe it, a definite maybe.  People do not go around cheerfully proclaiming, “Everything I believe is a total garbage.”

Broadly too, those individuals are divided into those who distinguish between their personal beliefs and universal truths.

It is those who insist what they believe is Truth with a capital T who are a pain in the arse to the rest of us, who say ‘x is true’ when what they mean is ‘I believe x is true’.

I am certainly not about to dwell in your ridiculous world of lies, accept your ludicrous delusional reality.

On a number of levels

 The denial of the history of the free world. Religion is mocked and that mockery enabled the free world, in which we are capable of distinguishing between ‘x is true’ and ‘ you believe x is true’ and entirely free to do so.

Your conduct is that of a sick animal, as defined by law, as defined by psychiatry.  If your conduct is the will of this god of yours, then your god is clearly a sick animal.

We are therefore now in the territory where the criminally insane are lauded and deferred to.

Certainly I should think it your curious contention – sorry, five-year-old English: since you a sick nutter, it is your party line that it is not you before whom I should abase myself, not your thoughts to which I should defer, but your god, of whom you are but the instrument.  I must accept the Will of this god, because it is further your contention that you alone possess truth; it is your monstrous contention – you’re a very sick nutter – that obedience to what you say, obedience to your (non-existent) authority is obedience to what God says, obedience to God’s authority.

You haven’t a clue what God thinks, should it exist.  You merely think you know.

I do know what it says it in the New Testament.  Within your own terms, since a) you are devoid of love and b) you are a coward, you do not represent Jesus.

I should forget my silly self-willed notions and lose myself in God is I think your basic position, but it is of course absolute rubbish that complying with the will of a self-willed, ignorant vicious animal constitutes loss of self.  What you mean is I should lose myself in you.  You are about as selfless as any other vandal, a two-year throwing a tantrum because he doesn’t get his own way other people, they won’t all obey him.  Nonetheless the scam is you have no self, you are immersed in God, but the agent of his purpose.

Loss of self constitutes union with reality.  The inside mirrors the outside.  You are clearly completely delusional, existing in a world solely inside your head.

You claim to possess absolute truth, but so do many other belief-systems.  You have no rational grounds for that conviction, any more than any other.  But if you hit me, I shall magically understand you are right and everyone else is wrong.  You are beyond pathetic.

I think my own thoughts.  You think your own thoughts.  It is a little bizarre that I should be expected to think, or at least pretend to think your thoughts and keep silent about my own thoughts.  Nonetheless it is a proposition often bought into.

Truth has been revealed to you.  Ah, you were there at the time?

You believe truth has been revealed to you.  Others believe a different truth has been revealed to them.  Others still believe no truth has been revealed to anyone.

Your beliefs are therefore to be respected because they are true,  Means because you think they’re true.

Argument by authority is a fallacy.

‘With god all things are possible.”   That may indeed be the case, evil grin, which physical laws applying depending on which side of the singularity you are.  Or simply if you are on the moon with less gravity. Nonetheless, this side there is the concept impossible things, for instance Virgin Birth, walking on water, rising from the dead.  You beliefs cannot therefore be held to be true.  They cannot be proven. 

In that majestic word of science, the effects described are not reproducible.

There is a good story about the man who built his house on rock and the man who built his house on sand

...a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. 
Luke 6

Your house is built on sand.  It is founded on the premiss of an omnipotent god who can therefore transcend the laws of physics but there is no proof of the existence of this god.

We are back therefore to argument by authority is a fallacy: God exists because you say so.

And historically as currently if people differ you’ll hit and hit and hurt them and kill them if they disagree with you, at very least sit hissing in your pit dribbling atheists are evil.  This is not impressive conduct.

We find ourselves at the argument by numbers.  A lot of people say so.  A lot of people have said a lot of things throughout history which have been shown to be flatly false.

Thus the concept of ‘faith’.  It is faith that underpins your conviction your truth is correct and everyone else is wrong, or in other words nothing whatever underpins it. People must have faith and not irritatingly require evidence. 

You would I think claim along with Murphy O’Connor that the absence of faith is the greatest of evils.

Why is the suspension of reason evil?

The answer of course is that once people start applying reason, your sand-castle collapses.

Reason or reality.  Once people emerge from the opium-haze and take a look at the world around them they discover the world is not as you describe it. 

Back to the series of propositions.  The person who put them together believes they make a coherent whole and convinces others of the coherence of the whole.

But others come along and worrit that it is neither coherent, nor a whole, hence a) theology and b) all those nasty heresies and schisms.  Still others come along and say this proposition or that is garbage and vicious garbage to boot. 

A fairly arbitrary collection of propositions choosing to taste from all the available possibilities.  Clearly Mohammed was convinced the Jews had called it correctly and God is One, dismissing both Trinity and polytheism.  He could also have said Jews are really interesting people and the source of many of my ideas but preferred to say Jews are apes and monkeys.

Christianity crashed on reality.  Marxism crashed on reality.  Islam is badly, badly threatened by reality and will do anything to maintain the dream. Yes, I know it doesn’t look threatened, but if we recall that even Tariq Ramadan had to admit the large number of Muslims who couldn’t be said to be even loosely practising, the picture is different.

It is marketed as Europe’s fastest growing religion but that is a false statistic, because it takes no account of the rate of loss, since for rather obvious reasons Muslims who have lost their faith or are as loosely Muslim as some Brits are loosely Christian, do not stand up shouting, look at us!  They really need to do so and indeed there may come a point when they have to do so but that requires the protection of bodies such as the Labour Party who at least currently are in bed with their would-be assassins 

Muslims in the West have come into contact with key realities, lots of other belief-systems, the reality of women and gays.  For all I know all those no longer practising have become Muslim-flavoured Buddhists, though I doubt it; could well be some.  How many Muslim teenagers in England do not have phones?  Everything the world has ever thought is in their hip-pockets.  The trick is therefore to stop them looking, keep them convinced Islam is the sole truth, to close their minds. Faith-schools are a good trick. 

You claim to represent Christianity.  You are clearly a fraud.  There is no love in you.  You are a coward.  Cowardice is fear and perfect love casts out fear.  That too is a matter of reality, the gulf between what is mouthed and what is observed. After 1800 years of Christian governance, people starved.  There would not have been a French Revolution had the Church spent the previous 1789 years insisting people love one another.

That too is a question of stopping people looking.  The mongol metal mechanical monkeys are so hypnotized by what you appear to be, what they think you must be, they cannot see what you are. 

How do I come to be subordinate to you?  I am one human being on this planet.  You are another.  That you believe your god, of whose existence there is no proof, says I am is not sufficient cause and reason. 

Just curious as to the rationale here.  I may not think what I think, but must think what you think.  Precisely how do you envisage what in practical terms is neurosurgery – you enter my mind and excise all parts of it displeasing to you – except fear is supposed to compel me to do that to myself. 

The pollies who back this drivel should also of course be the laughing-stock of the educated world.  I mean, really, Blair, is this some kind of joke?  The answer to which is yes and the name of the joke is you.  I’m supposed to erase from my mind everything I have read and everything I have thought, which does not concur with the untenable, unproven, unprovable drivel of this creature.  Or at least pretend to.

Let me be precise here.  Why should I erase true things to appease a nutter.  I know Marxism exists.  I know there was an epoch called the Enlightenment.  Unless we are to potter off to that level of discussion of knowing in which there is a possibility we are all brains in vats being fed illusory bodies, illusory surrounds, an illusory world, with an illusory history by a mad scientist, I am familiar with the facts of the political and intellectual history of the free world.  Were I to be terrorized into babbling dirty rubbish, I should in fact still know these things.  Why should I split myself being what is and what is not?   Why should I or anyone do that? 

You are a real lawyer, I take it?  Sarcasm is the lowest form of..but it’s fun.  I gather the courts take perjury seriously

Perjury is a statutory offence in England and Wales. It is created by section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911. Section 1 of that Act reads:
(1) If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.

So why does the law have no problem with people knowingly making false statements or remaining silent in order to create a false reality in which all concur with drivel?  Let alone being coerced into so doing.  Isn't there an offence of suborning a witness or something?

What on earth you thought you were  playing at, introducing the lying drivel of the Vatican – actually the word that occurs to me for you, Blair, is eaten, the unholy Trinity of Sacranie, Murphy O’Connor and the Cherie Amour simply sliced the top of your head off and ate your brain, then replaced it with an artificial one of their own devising.  I, you will gather, am not so susceptible.

Labour and the Tories look at the same country and reach radically different decisions about how best to run it.  But they don’t look at the country in its entirety, each leaving out the bits that offend against their preconceptions, usually with generous dollops of malice.  Thus the Tories don’t seriously think it matters what happens to poor people and Labour has decided to abolish intelligence as unequal.  They may or may not back up their positions with outright lies.

But no-one regards every word that drips from a polly’s mouth as Gospel truth or thinks pollies can’t be criticized, mocked, condemned.  Preferably not too many brazen lies, since we vote on the grounds that we believe one or other of the motley crew has got it right, or at least more right than the rest.

It is possible authoritarian, murderous, fascist regimes do not start murderous but since they are composed of lies they have to keep killing to maintain, protect, uphold the lies.

This is probably true of even something as personal as an ‘honour killing’.  At the level of the individual and his victim, many factors are in play, but at the level of the society which condones him the essential lie to be upheld is that women are subordinate to their male relatives. 

You’d really think fact matters to the mongol metal mechanical monkeys.  I mean, might they not give the wrong chemo or the wrong dose of chemo if they don’t first identify the facts.  The best I can come up is a computerized response.  They have no feeling for facts mattering in themselves as sane signposts to life, of truth being superior to lies.

Some Interesting Facts 
The first university in England to admit students of any race, class or religion, and the first to welcome women on equal terms with men. 
Students from outside London, and from overseas, present from the start. 
A teaching programme was established in which religious beliefs would not constrain the dissemination of knowledge and exploration of ideas. 
Academic disciplines introduced as required by the emerging industrial and commercial society; the first English university to offer the systematic teaching of law, architecture and medicine.  http://www.ucl.ac.uk/profile/175years.html 

Specifically of course they are an offence to UCL, aka 'that godless place in Gower Street'.

Lies split any one individual between what is and what he or she thinks is.  Truth is bedrock.  Lies are a bottomless ocean in which to drown.  Some people prefer not to know.  Those who treat terminal illness must know of people who don’t want to know.  Fact will happen anyway.   You may feel in a situation such as being left by a partner you still love that truth is the bottomless ocean but that is pain talking.  It isn’t.  You now know where you stand and can conduct yourself accordingly.

But we can and do argue vociferously, mock, deride, cartoon the politicians in place to govern us.  By what sleight of hand can we not argue vociferously, mock, deride, cartoon the religious who seek to govern us via the politicians and whose edicts directly govern others, whether in the microcosms of religious communities here or abroad. 

In other words how in a democracy does religion come to constitute unaccountable authority, authority that is not to be closely scrutinized, pinned to the wall, have its dirty linen washed in public?

What are we not talking about?  People praying, meditating, helping old ladies across the road, comforting the broken-hearted, advocating peace and love.
What are we talking about?  Belief-systems that are actually politics in disguise, seeking to control society by controlling what people may say and write, what within their own communities or abroad, people may wear, with whom and under what conditions people may make love.  People regard Islam as totalitarian for the breathtakingly simple reason that some versions of it are: there is no area of life involving interaction with other humans in which people are free to make their own decisions.  People who assume control, assume mastery, assume the rights of property. As of course are the Christian churches where they still hold sway

Yes.  Yes, Blair, you are mad.

The problem with being an Oxford lawyer and former Prime Minister is the problem with being a doctor or nurse: hard to plead diminished responsibility.  All of you are actually responsible for your actions, inaction being a form of action, a choice.  You are responsibility for choosing what you did.

OK, I believe there is one reality and every civilization in the world has got a handle on it.  According to taste and local considerations each emphasizes some bits, leaves out others, but it’s all the same trip, just as when you strip away local considerations, ‘flat earth’ religion is much of a muchness.

I just sit here waiting for a logical closely reasoned argument to convince me of why I may not believe that.  Believe it, mother-fuckers, you got Troof doesn’t hack it.  Psychopathic animals, delusional, belong in Broadmoor, convinced all are subject to the drivel between their ears. 

I also believe a number of wholly unexceptionable things.  Fascism is evil (wasn't there something of a fuss about that?).  Women, gays, people of all races are equal in rights and possess the same gamut of human possibility.  Which in five year old English is of course a woman can be brilliant and of course a woman can be brutally stupid, of course a gay can be kind and self-sacrificing and of course he or she can be a total shit.

I oppose fascism, sexism, racism and homophobia and their proponents, things the whole of society is supposed to do, and find I am supposed to be in the wrong because the fairy-dust of the fnord {{{Religion}}} has been sprinkled over these things making them epitomize the sacred.

{FNORD!}  {FNORD!}  {FNORD!}  
Oh, RTFM. 
No, tards, not fjords, those are what Slartibartfast was so good at designing.  Just remember he was very proud of Norway.  You might learn something thereby if you were capable of learning, but of course you are not. 

The word, says Wikipedia drily, lacks clear definition, but one such is that which shuts down rational processes, one such being undoubtedly the capacity to analyse new information.  A fnord is a propaganda word conditioned in the masses from a very young age to respond to, usually with fear, anxiety, or uneasiness, but unable to be seen by the general populace, says the Urban Dictionary. 

However, I cannot discuss an invisible word, so let me stick with conditioned responses to particular words, or indeed explore the concept of fnord more closely  Perhaps a fnord is rather a word that makes invisible the real word for something.  Thus devout or doctor may replace the real word thug or psychopath. 

Religion is a particularly good fnord.  It Is Religion.  No, this person is not a feral psycho animal.  He Is Religious.  Ah, then, says anyone sane, his religion demands he be a feral psycho animal.  Who gives a fuck about such a religion.  After all, ‘fnord’ is shorter than ‘whited sepulchre’. 

Respect for, deference to, uncritical acceptance of, refraining from pissing with laughter at unprovable and sometimes vicious and unprovable statements and those who propose them do not provide a rational foundation for society.

Which is why they don’t exist.  
Falsity, that was it.  The over-arching illusion of self that needs to dominate and control others, that thinks others an extension of it, to do and be and say and read and write what it decrees, composed of lies, lies about itself, lies about others, lies about the world, and so contains nothing true, nothing real.  Nothing solid.  If you open them up, there’s nothing there, except garbage, drivel, delusion, illusion.  Sand-castles washed away by the tide.
 
Layer upon layer, power, wealth, corrupt law, all to protect them from reality, the simple and most obvious realities such as other human beings who are separate from them, different, equal in rights, coming from somewhere else, running on separate tracks, the frantic desire to make us all crawl to them, be mirrors of their will, such that disagreement, fact, will not perturb the fragile screaming self, which will totter, fall if the lies of which it is composed are destroyed, total inadequacy, conceal it is an intellectually emotionally morally impotent animal who cannot cope with love and mind and can only butcher and destroy, cannot cope with being challenged by a woman, ludicrous creatures who live in a fantasy world, a world that exists only in their heads, and demand we must all share their insanity, power, wealth, control their dependencies, without which they feel incomplete, the crutches to which they cling. Devoid of love and mind, they feel permanently incomplete.  If they can just get more power, more money, more control, they’ll be in command of life, as other people cling to drink or drugs or  shopping.  It can never be enough to them to just be themselves, everyone else has to be them too.
 
Conclusion
This is no longer England.  The entire State and Establishment have been taken over by fascism and evil and call it good in the form of the kind of primitive religion  few have given a fuck about for about 300 years.   It is given that the drivelling, unproven and unprovable propositions of religion are to be taken seriously and that they automatically over-ride all fact, reason and morality.  No intellectual or moral standards are to be upheld because that would make the stupid and criminal feel bad about themselves.  We must all run at the level of the ignorant, stupid, ineducable, delusional, psychotic and violent, the hysteric, the thug, the IQflatline zombie who lives in a world that exists solely in its head, and which jabbers the words in its head regardless of their having no connection whatever with fact, reason, morality or reality, the freak, the damaged animal impervious to new information, unreachable by love or mind, the frankly psychotic to whom it does not occur that others have sole rights over our own minds and bodies, the complete nut-job that assumes all are at its command, creatures rotten to the core, devoid of intellect, devoid of ethics, to whom truth, fact, justice mean nothing.  If we do not we shall be beaten up
 
If you are educated, literate, intelligent, rational, free and democratic, you are a hunted animal scheduled for destruction.  Do not expect anyone to help or support you.  Do not in particular expect ‘Her Majesty’s Government’ and the organs thereof to uphold democracy.     Do not expect anyone to care if your back is broken, care about total intellectual and moral corruption, care about the medical ethics, care about the sovereign liberty of the individual, care if you live or die.  You are not vermin.  Only vermin matter, the more sordid, degenerate, perverted and filthy the better.  There is nothing they will not surrender to keep vermin happy. 
 
Look at all the mongs, everyone, oh do look, do look at all filthy ignorant psychopathic ineducable illiterate  cunt-for-brains vindictive fascist mongs, all riddled with malice, the dirty spiteful butchering murdering mongs, the tards, the spassos, the no-hopers who think they’re the intellectual elite of the country.  But that is a depressing sight and infinitely more entertaining is the sight of supposed professors in the University of London insisting mindless wordless murderous mongs actually are the intellectual elite of the country.  So much for the intellectual standards of medicine.
 
For supposed academics they really don’t like fact.  Here’s a simple one for you obscene repulsive cunts.  My mind is my property.  I choose what goes into it.  I choose what I do with its contents.  I choose what I say and write.  My body is my property.   I choose what to do with it and what may be done to it.  It is not the property of an obscene senile psychopath pervert to break as he chooses. You do not decide for me, you obscene smelly foul mad twisted depraved vermin, you do not fucking decide, dirt-monkeys, that I don’t really need to be able to walk properly and to run.  You do not fucking decide you repulsive sick twisted psychopath lunatics, that I do not need to be able to survive. You do not sit there and watch me being crippled, spectator sport for the criminally insane.
 
You do not fail to uphold the governing-system of the country and commit numerous crimes in furtherance of its destruction unless you wish at some point to be prosecuted for treason.  Your obscene insolence is of course boundless.
 
Burn the witch at the stake!/How much money we shall make!  I'm actually supposed to have done something wrong by being  intelligent, educat,ed literate, honest, principled, free, democratic, rational, civilized, by having a mind of my own and the capacity to use it, by being capable of independent thought. Sick dirt cunt filth like Linch and Goldstone ain't 'aving it, sexually sick senile old monkeys whose paradigm of womanhood is an ignorant ineducable irrational IQflatline child-monster-animal with golden curls who poses no threat. That of course is the sickest joke of all.  Why have they not been thrown out, Vice-Chancellor?  Why has the cancer in the University called medicine committed to the destruction of everything the  University stands for not been eradicated? Lower than lower than vermin.