Monthly Archive for August, 2006Page 2 of 3

Why Atheism is not a religion

Many theists (Christians, in particular) often argue that atheism is a religion - that it requires as much faith as their own beliefs. That you have to take a leap of faith to believe in the absense of a god, much like they do to believe that one exists.

However, these people are wrong. Atheism is not a religion. Want to see why?

Say you’re an average Christian.

Do you believe in Santa Claus? I’m betting that you don’t.

Now, do you consider your non-belief in Santa a religion? Do you have two religions (Christianity and Santa-non-belief), then?

I’m sure you’re answering “of course not, that’s absurd, my lack of belief in Santa Claus is in no way a religion.”

So there. ;)

(This has already been mentioned in the myths about atheists comments, but I think it deserves a post of its own)

Oh, by the way, there’s now a part 2 as well. :)

Christian myths about Atheism: discussion

The original 16 Common Myths About Atheists post currently has a huge amount of comments, which may scare new readers off. Besides, most of them have diverged from the original purpose of the article (and I’m guilty of that as well, in my replies) - the discussion quickly left the myths about atheists, and became about whether God exists or not.

So, we can continue the discussion here. :) However, just one request: let’s try to go back to the original subject: the myths about atheists. Either whether they exist or not (though I have already posted about that here), and whether some of them are correct - that is, they aren’t really myths, because atheists are indeed like that (I don’t think we are, though there may be some sporadic exceptions).

So, without further ado… feel free to comment. ;)

The "death" of skepticism?

Steve Pavlina, whom I’ve already mentioned here a couple of times, is one of my favorite bloggers. His posts about improving one’s life are incredibly insightful, brilliantly argued, and a joy to read - not to mention that he (through his posts) actually helped in my decision of quitting my job and writing / blogging full time.

However, lately there’s been a growing vein of new age mysticism in his writing, which is worrying - and, in a way, enlightening about human nature. It also serves as a warning.

A recent example is this post, The Death of Skepticism.

Now, Steve, as I said, is obviously a very intelligent guy, and a great writer. But… there is something seriously wrong in a post like that one. I won’t dissect his entire post here, only some parts which should be ringing every alarm bell in any rational human being.

Apparently it’s cool to be a doubter these days.

Ahem… In which planet do you live, Steve? I’d like to move there, because it sounds much more rational and sane than the planet I live in, where skeptics are called “materialist”, “cold and grey”, and, if you’re in a more fundamentalist country like the U.S., you’re also a “communist”, “traitor”, “terrorist”, “anti-american”, and absurdities like that.

Steve, IT’S NOT COOL TO BE A DOUBTER THESE DAYS! I wish it was, but it isn’t. There are almost no skeptics left - it’s absolutely “uncool” to be one. Religious fundamentalism is rising. Cults and sects thrive everywhere. “Mediums” of all kind are getting rich, and more and more appear each day. If anyone is “persecuted”, or at least discriminated against, it’s atheists, secular humanists, and skeptics in general.

I realized that if the universe were actually subjective, I’d never recognize it as such if I believed it was objective, since I’d simply manifest an objective universe.

I see several problems with that:

1- did you never dream, or imagine stuff? As a child, didn’t you ever believe that there were monsters under the bed, or stuff like that? Did the monsters actually appear? Did they come into existence? I don’t think so.

2- are you the only being in the world? By your “logic”, if thoughts create reality but you weren’t doing it because you believed reality was objective, then others should have been doing it, anyway. Did you see anything? Did anything strange happen? Ever had a neighbor with “weird powers”? Sorry, but I’m betting otherwise.

Unfortunately, testing for subjectivity is an oxymoron. You can’t actually test for a subjective universe. The whole idea of testing implies doubt, and doubt will corrupt the test if the universe really is subjective.

Sorry, Steve, but this is nonsense. This kind of mentality requires - and ends causing - a conscious intellectual reduction, so that you begin to believe things your rational mind knows not to be true. You have to “repress” your reason, and force yourself to believe such things are true - and, after you do, since the human mind is easily influenced, it’s easy to “see” them, even if they aren’t really happening.

If you convince yourself that you have mental powers, that you feel precognitive “flashes”, then you will feel them, but you will only notice - and remember - those that coincided with reality. You’ll count the hits and ignore the misses - even if the “misses” are a much greater number, and the “hits” are no more than the average for any person. After all, you are forcing yourself to believe.

Looking at it from a different angle: if, for your “powers” to work, you need to be completely un-skeptic, free of doubt… then why not ask someone else to test them? You may be doubt-free, and leave the skepticism needed for testing to another person. Or are your powers so feeble that even someone else’s skepticism is enough to hinder them? Do they only work if you’re surrounded by blind believers, who believe anything? Is the proximity of a rational being like kryptonite to you? :)

Really, it actually does me good to see posts like this. It’s a lesson - even geniuses can fall prey to irrationality, to wishful thinking. Much like freedom, the price of rationality is eternal vigilance.

Are the myths about atheists real or not?

One thing I’ve seen, both in the article comments and in the Reddit discussion, is people who doubt that these myths really exist - in other words, that there are Christians who really believe that about atheists.

The myths do exist, but mostly in “evangelical” Christians. They’re much rarer in more secular countries, like those in Europe, or in less evangelical sections of Christianity, such as Catholicism, which is much “tamer” these days than so-called “born again” (American) Christians. Therefore, it’s quite possible that you have been lucky and have never had to deal with people who really believe in these myths.

But those people exist - especially in the United States. The Reddit discussion provided me with an article: U.S. trust lower for atheists. Some lovely bits from the article:

researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, homosexuals and other groups as “sharing their vision of American society.” Americans are also least willing to let their children marry atheists.

Unbelievable, right? But there’s more:

“Many Americans seem to believe some kind of religious faith is central to being a good American and a good person.”

Right-o. We can’t have people around thinkin’ for themselves, or questionin’ authority, no siree!

Those surveyed tended to view people who don’t believe in a god as the “ultimate self-interested actor who doesn’t care about anyone but themselves,”

“Ultimate self-interested actor” certainly sounds impressive. :) But, again, we’re all evil, as nobody can be a moral person without God, right? That’s myth 3.

Still, Ries said, “I don’t believe that anybody is really an atheist. I believe that deep down everyone knows there is a god.”

Aaaand… that’s myth 5 for you.

“I know atheists aren’t studied that much as a sociological group, but I guess atheists are one of the last groups remaining that it’s still socially acceptable to hate,” Foley said.

Indeed, it is.

“I would rather have my kids marry someone of a different religion than someone who has none,” she said.

Right. Better a different irrationality, than being rational.

That’s just one single article. I’m sure that I could find evidence of most of the other myths existing, and maybe I will. But I hope that this will convince some of you that I didn’t just make up a list of myths as a straw man argument. :)

The problem of Agnosticism, part 2

While my most recent post about the Christian myths about atheists (yes, some of you were right, they’re really Christian myths, as I’m not really familiar with Buddhists, Taoists and such) attracted a lot of comments, a previous post of mine, The problem of Agnosticism also had some replies - including ones that called me “closed-minded”, and thought the post was “the biggest piece of retardation”. How can I resist the temptation to follow up on it? :)

First, I have to say that I stand by what I said in that post. I warned readers that they might be offended, though that wasn’t my goal, and, sure enough, some were. Agnosticism is not really caring about the matter enough to think about it - or, to some (not any of you, apparently, but it is to some people), it’s a “get out of jail card”: just in case God happens to exist, best not offend him too much.

A lot of people also called me “arrogant” because I am certain about something that nobody can truly, ever, be 100% certain about: that there is no God. I don’t have mind/time/space powers to be absolutely sure. Why be an atheist, then, instead of an agnostic?

Because, as someone said in the Reddit discussion, that would also mean that you’d have to be Zeus-agnostic, Shiva-agnostic, Odin-agnostic, Invisible Pink Unicorn-agnostic and Flying Spaghetti Monster-agnostic. That is, you can’t be 100% certain that each one of them doesn’t exist.

If you’re not a sheep who follows the crowd, if you accept that many people believing in something doesn’t make it true, then you have no more reason to believe in Jehovah than in Odin. Is this so hard to grasp? Is Odin less “real” - or less likely to exist - than the Christian god, simply because virtually no one believes in him today?

(A Christian, here, will say “the difference is that God is real and Odin is not”. Circular logic, anyone? The reason to believe God is real is that you believe God is real?!?)

An agnostic, then, will say that he has no way of really knowing that God doesn’t exist. But neither can he prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn’t exist. Nobody can prove it. So, in order for it to make any bit of sense, he has to call himself an FSM-agnostic.

And why restrict himself to gods? He’s never seen a goblin or a fairy, but, then again, he hasn’t been in every single place in the world. If he really has an open mind, he can’t say that fairies or goblins don’t exist. He must, therefore, be a fairy-agnostic and a goblin-agnostic. In fact, he can’t be certain about the non-existence of the Easter Bunny either.

See the problem?

Agnosticism, like I said in the other post, is like calculating 2 + 2, and the result is 4 every time… and, yet, you refuse to say that “2 + 2 = 4″, because that’s “arrogant” - it may no longer be 4 the next time you calculate it. (*) If that isn’t intellectually lazy - and crippling -, then I don’t know what it is.

(*) please, no semantic games, like redefining the meaning of “2″ or “+”, or using base 3. :)

16 Common Myths About Atheists

  1. Atheists hate Christians and Christianity. No, we don’t. Personally, I do hate the atrocities that have been committed in the name of religion, the dishonesty of most religions, and the way that they encourage people not to think or question, and not to trust or use their minds. But I don’t dislike someone just because of their religion.
  2. Most atheists started out as Christians, and stopped believing because of some bad experience with other Christians. Or maybe we simply started to question, to wonder what happened when we applied the standards of logic, reason and burden of proof to religion, as we already did to everything in our lives. Or, perhaps, we were never believers at all. It happens, you know.
  3. Atheists have no sense of morality, since morality comes from God. Ah, the old “without fear of hell, there would be nothing to stop people from being bloodthirsty monsters” argument. It may come as a surprise to most Christians, but there are reasons for being “good” other than fear of punishment - which isn’t really a reason, anyway, and only shows Christians in a very bad light. Reasons like human empathy, genuine feelings for others, and, most importantly, rational principles. Behaving yourself just because daddy will spank you otherwise does not make you a nice child.
  4. Atheists are a unified group, like a church. Are we? I must have missed the memo, then. :) If anything, I’d say atheists are more diverse than Christians, because we’re less “sheep-like”, and don’t accept things on faith, or from authority.
  5. Atheists actually know, deep inside, that there’s a God, as that’s perfectly obvious; they are simply too proud and arrogant to admit the existence of something greater than themselves. Not exactly. You see, the existence of a god is only “obvious” if you’ve been brainwashed (either by others, or by your own irrationality) into believing it. We are truly convinced that there’s no god, and are not in denial. Really. I’m serious. :)
  6. Atheists don’t really know anything about Christianity. Again, it depends. Some certainly know more than others. However, religion is so ubiquitous that, like it or not, we’ve all had varying degrees of contact with it, with its teachings, and with believers. Besides, a lot of atheists are naturally curious. I, myself, have read the Christian Bible - more than once, in fact. Now, dear believer, ask yourself how many atheist books, magazines or essays you have read. Oh, I forgot, they’re all the work of Satan.
  7. Atheists’ lives are cold and empty, as they can’t feel the joy and love that comes only from God. Really? I’d never call my life “cold” or “empty” - I have the joys of friendship, love, family, and doing the things I love to do. And, what’s more, I’m self-sufficient, unlike anyone who says “I don’t know how anyone could live without God in their lives” - as many Christians do.
  8. Atheists are depressive and nihilistic, since they believe there’s nothing after death, and therefore there’s no point to anything. On the contrary, we, unlike you, know how precious life is, because we’re aware that it’s our only one. And, this may come as a shock to you, but we can love our lives, we can feel the joy of being alive, because we don’t believe that “this is the devil’s world”, or that “this is just a test before the real thing”. Life is precious, and it’s our own - not any god’s.
  9. Atheists are cold and uncaring. No, we are not. Having delusions doesn’t make anyone more “caring”. And, again, we treat life as precious, and do what we can to improve it, both ours and that of our loved ones. On the other hand, many Christians believe life is suffering, and that there’s nothing we can do about it.
  10. Atheists are arrogant. What, because we dare to use our minds instead of asking “who are we to know”? No, we’re not.
  11. Atheists want to forbid religious worship. Wrong. We just don’t want to be harmed by it. Want to believe in God, Jesus, Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy? Be my guest. Want to teach your kids to do the same? I feel sorry for them, but it will still take many years until people realize how crippling one’s reason in childhood is like a bird crippling its offspring’s wings. (*) Want to give all your money to a guy with a Lexus and a bad haircut? Fine. But don’t try to “save” me, don’t harass me in the street or at my home, don’t get politicians to enact laws to give power to you, don’t try to teach your religion in science classes by dishonestly giving it a new name and disguising it as “science”, and don’t use my tax money to write your idiocies in public places. In short, do as you want, as long as you keep it to yourself - just like I don’t go to your place trying to un-convert you.
  12. Atheists are incapable of feeling awe at simple things, like a beautiful sunset, as they see everything in terms of cold science, instead of miracles. Ah, unweaving the rainbow - the idea that beauty and poetry only exist if we know little to nothing about how things work. But I ask you: does the fact that you know about astronomy, physics and light make the sunset any less beautiful? Was it beautiful only because it seemed “magical” - or “an act of god” - to you?
  13. Atheists live their lives in constant fear of death. Few people actually want to die - those that do are either depressed and suicidal, or are Christians who believe that the world is evil, “please, Lord Jesus, take me”, and all that. A reasonable fear of death is perfectly natural. Also, we may believe that this life “is it”, which makes us treat it as precious, but, at least, we don’t think that there’s a chance of going to a place where you burn and are tortured for eternity…
  14. Most criminals are atheists (or, alternatively, the percentage of atheists among criminals is higher than among the general populace). Oddly enough, the opposite is true.
  15. Atheists are stubborn and closed-minded. Not unless you define “closed-minded” like this. But, as Ebon said, Ask any believer what would convince him he was mistaken and persuade him to leave his religion and become an atheist, and if you get a response, it will almost invariably be, “Nothing - I have faith in my god.” Although such people may well exist, I personally have yet to meet a theist who would acknowledge even the possibility that his belief was in error. Many theists, by their own admission, structure their beliefs so that no evidence could possibly disprove them. Atheists, on the other hand, are easy to convince - all it requires is for God to show himself in some unfakeable way - say, for instance, by doing any of the many things he supposedly did in the Old Testament…
  16. Atheists make bad parents. Again, there are good and bad atheist parents, and good and bad Christian parents. Atheist parents, however, would never do what Abraham was about to do to his son Isaac (and Christians see Abraham’s behavior as laudable!), because, to most atheists, our lives are our own. In fact, even if there was a God, it would not follow that our lives are his.

Note: There’s already a list, The Top 10 Atheist Myths, by Dave Silverman, but mine isn’t inspired by that one. I agree with what Silverman writes, but I don’t think all of those are necessarily the top myths. Not to say my list is better, but these are what I think are the top myths… and a couple of them are actually in both lists. Besides, my list has more myths than his, which obviously makes it better. :D

(*) There used to be something harsher there, where I seemed to (but didn’t) compare teaching religion to children to sexual abuse. I just meant to say that it was crippling, and should be seen as we see parents who refuse their kids medical treatment because they’d rather put their faith in god: bad parents who aren’t capable of being parents. As it was misunderstood, I edited it. Any (pre-edit) comments about it are still below, though.

EDIT: Don’t believe that many Christians actually think some these things about atheists? Please read my new post, Are the myths about atheists real or not? :)

EDIT 2: Because there are so many comments, and because most of them (including some of my replies) were getting too far from the original subject, I’ve closed the comments for this post, and created a new one: Christian myths about Atheism: discussion. If you want to comment, or reply to this post’s comments, please go there.

The problem of Agnosticism

(Warning: you may be offended by this one…)

In this world, there are probably more agnostics than atheists. And I’m betting that most of you won’t see that as a problem, as a sign that there’s something wrong with people. Yet…

Why am I an atheist? Because I am convinced that there is no such thing as a “god”. Much like I am convinced that there is no Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, or that there are no monsters under my bed - even though I am not looking under it now. No, I don’t have some magical time-space powers which enable me to instantly look through the entire universe, not to mention any supposed “spiritual” realms, to know that there is no “god” out there. What I do know is that there’s not the slightest indication of there being one, other than a great number of people irrationally believing in some fairy tale without proof. Unlike theists, I don’t hate or distrust my mind, and I can use it to deduce things. There’s absolutely no sign of a “god” or “gods” in the universe, so, even if somehow they existed, 1) all human religions would be wrong about them, and 2) they wouldn’t affect our lives in any way.

Why is anyone an agnostic? Two possibilities: either because they don’t give a damn about reality (intellectual cowardice and laziness), or because they want a way out in case there actually is a god.

Let’s expand the two possibilities:

Continue reading ‘The problem of Agnosticism’

Some phrases I find quite annoying

  • “Your problem is that you think about things too much.” No. The “problem” is that you think, period… in a world where what is “normal”, what almost everyone does, is not think at all, and live in a state of permanent apathy, in which you don’t feel anything bad… or good. Living implies thinking, and thinking implies feeling. But people are such cowards that it’s “abnormal” to think, to feel or to live. They just go on, like automatons.
  • “People, these days, are much too individualistic.” Whoever says that is, desperately, in need of being hit with a dictionary on their head - a very heavy and hard one, if possible. Because it only shows that they don’t know what “individualistic”, or “individualist”, mean, at all. If they knew, they wouldn’t see it as a fault (hint: mankind is not mean to live like an ant colony), and, more importantly, would never say that people, these days, are such. Looking around me, I see very little individualism… what I see a lot of, instead, are stupidity, pettiness and smallness. Individualism is heroic, not mediocre… look around you, and tell me which of the two you see more of.
  • <insert band name>? Ah, I only like <insert song name>.”. Really? Just that one? You know all the others, then? You know any of the others? Ah, so you never actually heard them, right? Then stop saying such idiocies.

"Closed minds"

Unless you’re some kind of religious fundamentalist, it’s likely that you will agree that an open mind is a positive quality. And, when arguing, both you and your opponents should be on guard against having a closed mind, that is, refusing to even consider the possibility that you are wrong.

However, some people - I see this from time to time - use the “you don’t have an open mind!” argument in a very peculiar way…

It goes like this:

Person A: “2 plus 2 equals 4.”

Person B: “That’s very closed-minded. You’re not even considering the possibility that you’re wrong, and that 2 + 2 equals something other than 4. You refuse to listen to any opinions or ideas different from your own. Other people may believe that 2 + 2 equals, say, 5, and who’s to say that you know better than them? How can you be so arrogantly sure? You talk about keeping an open mind, and yet you accept on faith than 2 + 2 equals 4, and refuse to think further about it. That’s dogmatic, like any religion.”

<sigh>

Yes, relativism is a terrible thing - it denies the existence of facts, of an objective reality. To a relativist, there are no facts, only opinions, and there’s nothing that says that one is better or truer than another. A relativist prides himself on “an open mind”, because, after all, he’s prepared to believe anything and everything, without judging, without using his mind at all.

However, that attitude is nothing more than a refusal to think and to deal with an objective reality on its terms. It’s pure cowardice - reality is scary, so you deny it.

An open mind does not mean denying the existence of facts. That’s just an absurd distortion of the concept.

"All things are possible"…

The Martian has already commented on a great comment (!) from a thread in the God Is For Suckers blog, so I won’t repeat what he said; he’s obviously right. :)

However, another comment caught my attention as well. It’s the 2nd one, by Lynda:

And if she does fail she blames herself for not having enough faith in gawd or Jeebus. She will set unrealistic goals based on fairy tale expectations because some book promised that she would succeed if she just has enough belief in the “all powerful”. The end result is self-loathing and mistrust of her own abilities. She won’t be able to rejoice and take pride in any real accomplishments because they won’t measure up to the “all things are possible” standard.

See the problem? God is supposed perfectly good and all powerful, and the Bible says that “faith can move mountains”, that “with enough faith, all things are possible”.

So what if you pray for success in something… and fail?

Christian fundies will never doubt the existence of God. Nor his omnipotence, or his goodness. What remains, then? Lack of faith. With all the guilt it implies.

Say you have a sick son and pray for his recovery. He dies. But… how could that happen, since the Bible states that “God notices even the fall of a sparrow”? What about the promises of our prayers being heard? And aren’t all things supposed to be possible to God, and therefore to anyone with God on his/her side?

If you don’t doubt God, then only two explanations remain. One, “it was God’s plan” - which would make God an evil sadist, worthy of contempt, lower than most human beings, if he existed. The second explanation is “your faith wasn’t enough”. Or, in other words, “you deserved it”.

A lot of Christians say that they don’t think they could go on through life without their faith in God. Yet they’re the unhappy ones, always feeling guilty, because if something bad happens to them, their lack of faith - their “wickedness” - is to blame. After all, God is perfect, and he promised… if only you had enough faith…

(Now, some people will say that “God helps those who help themselves.” It’s an improvement… but it’s a modern interpretation, absolutely contrary to what it says in the Bible. I thought it was supposed to be the word of God?)

Ayn Rand was NOT a conservative

Ayn Rand, one of my favorite authors, is seen by many conservatives as “one of them”, as their “champion”, because she was totally opposed (and rightly so) to socialism and collectivism, supposed characteristics of “liberals” (at least in the American definition of the term).

However, conservatives have “stolen” Ayn Rand in pretty much the same way that Charles Manson “stole” Helter Skelter, a very good song by the Beatles. The song became associated with a repulsive murderer, while its creators never intended such a thing.

Like I said, it’s the same thing. I can’t say I love Rand’s books and philosophy without being seen as “conservative”. And yet…

  1. Ayn Rand was an atheist. Conservatives are mostly Christian (and usually pretty fanatical about it).
  2. Ayn Rand had no use for tradition. Conservatives worship tradition.
  3. Ayn Rand said that reason should be man’s only absolute. To conservatives, reason is irrelevant; what matters is faith, obedience, duty, tradition (again), etc..
  4. Ayn Rand believed in a minimal government. Conservatives like to convince themselves of the same, but in fact they want their governments to legislate morality, outlawing anything they believe to be “wicked” - even if done by consenting adults. (edit: if you don’t see what I mean here, read the 2nd comment)
  5. Ayn Rand believed in the heroic. Conservatives have no use for it.
  6. Ayn Rand believed that man’s own happiness is the moral purpose of his life. Conservatives believe in sacrifice to “the country” (much like socialists believe in sacrifice to “the people” - see, they aren’t so different after all), and servitude to God.
  7. Ayn Rand believed in progress (though not in the sense that socialists say “progressive”), and in improving our lives. Conservatives do everything in their power to return to “better times”, or, at least, to keep everything as it is.
  8. Ayn Rand believed that only rational beings have rights. Conservatives have no problem with killing people in a war (they’re foreigners, anyway), but believe embryos, which aren’t sentient and don’t even feel pain, are “sacred”, and can’t be harmed, even if it means sacrificing living people with diseases.
  9. Ayn Rand said that morality comes from rational principles. Conservatives believe it comes from God, that there is no rational reason to be “good” except that God wills it.
  10. Ayn Rand believed in the non-initiation of force. Conservatives invaded Iraq for no reason at all.
  11. Ayn Rand believed in freedom. Conservatives believe in freedom to agree with them.

And I could go on.

Dear conservatives: please stop trying to steal one of my favorite thinkers for yourselves. She wasn’t like you at all, and you are only showing that you never understood what she wrote (or never read it at all) in the first place. Thank you.

Honesty and the Iraq war: calling things what they are

Two posts ago, I wrote:

Let’s hope this is but the beginning of a wave of people finding out where their balls are.

And I’d really like to see it happening, though I’m not too optimistic.

For instance, take U.S. Democrats. While they criticize the Bush administration, they always say things like “mismanagement of the war”, “faulty intelligence on WMDs”, “negligence”, and so on.

Where is the politician (Democrat or Republican) with the courage to say that Bush lied? That the war was, and is, all based on deceit? Is it political suicide to say the truth, these days? Is it barely acceptable to say that the war wasn’t handled very well, but not to say that it was wrong from the start? That there never were any WMDs there, or a connection to 9/11, or any kind of threat to the U.S.?

How many politicians supported the war because they didn’t want to be seen as “weak”? Were they all deceived by the administration’s lies? I doubt it. They simply went along with the lies, because they’d lose influence if they spoke up - they’d be seen as “weak on terrorism”, as (perish the thought) “liberals”.

The Iraq war isn’t being “mismanaged”, it’s going exactly like the Bush administration wants: never-ending. Why, if the war ever came to an end, people might want their lost civil liberties back… or believe that it was OK to criticize the president again without being “unpatriotic”… or notice the state of the economy… and we don’t want that, do we?




Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 Portugal
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 Portugal