Now this should frighten everyone, it sure did me! A new memo surfaces from John Tanton expressing his thoughts on Hilters failure of promoting the true case for eugenics.

In 1989, the founder of the modern day anti-immigrant movement, John Tanton, told Otis L. Graham Jr. that “I have all along seen the immigration battle as really a skirmish in a wider war . . .” Since that time critics of Tanton have worried that his “wider war” would be one steeped in racism and white nationalism. Critics had reason to worry, particularly because of Tanton’s strong commitment to the false study of eugenics. When one cuts straight to the chase eugenics can be defined as the forced sterilization of poor and brown skinned people.

Critics should worry even more. In a recently surfaced memo, The Case for Passive Eugenics, Tanton argues for a softer, gentler eugenics movement because simply “Hitler’s reign in Nazi Germany did little to advance the discussion of eugenics among sensitive persons.” Tanton still serves on the board of his most influential organization – the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Other items to surface in these newly uncovered Tanton memos include:

“I’m sure it will give you a new understanding of the Jewish outlook on life, which explains a large part of the Jewish opposition to immigration reform.” – John Tanton promoting an article written by anti-Semite Kevin McDonald of Occidental Quarterly a vicious anti-Semitic journal [Source: Letter to Mrs. C.S. May, December 10, 1998].

“You are saying a lot of things that need to be said, but I anticipate it will be very tough sledding” – John Tanton writing to Jared Taylor of the white supremacist group Council of Conservative Citizens concerning Taylor’s draft newsletter [Source: Letter to Jared Taylor, October 10, 1990].

“I’ve been a reader of your materials for some time, and hope that we can meet some day. Is there any chance that you could come up and join us?” – John Tanton inviting Wayne Lutton of the white supremacist group Council of Conservative Citizens to a FAIR event [Source: Letter to Wayne Lutton, June 10, 1991].

96 Thoughts to “John Tanton believes Hilter had the right idea but wrong approach?”

  1. NotGregLetiecq

    Michael, I hate to break this to you, but it really isn’t necessary to instruct us to “ignore” a post that has your name at the top. ( =

  2. Michael

    Daryl, I agree. The problem is when you are opposed to “illegal” immigration because of the POVERTY issues it creates and the population growth issues it creates (reducing your wealth production, and increasing exploitation of workers with no legal protection, creating a “nobility class” of super rich, without putting that wealth back into the economy) that creates even more poverty (a form of serfdom), and reduces overall community wealth (making only a few people rich) and undermines Democracy by the the “illegal” behavior of breaking the law, you get thrown in with every racist crackpot who also opposes illegal immigration for purely racist reasons.

    That is like saying Elena is opposed to “anti-immigrant” sentiment because she thinks it creates more poverty in the world to leave people where they are and she wants to bring everyone in the world into the US who is poor (all 4-5 billion of them) and because of that sympathetic belief people like Greg L. accuse her of being a mexican militant terrorist supporter, when she is not.

    I know why she supports “illegal” immigration, for humanitarian reasons, and for sympathy, so much so she seems willing to accept “lawless behavior” as part of the process. I disagree with her on this point whenever I see her allude to it. I’ve seen evidence that overpopulation and un-controlled growth of “illegal” immigration into a weakened economy will only weaken it furthur, especially if the skill categories are low, and will only increase the poverty in local US communities where this growth is uncontrolled. I support anti-“illegal” efforts for humanitarian reasons also, and for reasons that it is destroying our Democracy as political groups from these nations segregate into racial, gender, religious and ethnic groups, just as they do in the countries they came from, which rapidly increases the political conditions for racism (on their part), facism, militant socialism, autocracy, criminalization of the political infrastructure, anarchy, and eventual conflict and warfare, for the very same reasons it happens in every other country embroiled in ethnic wars. That is the most paramount humanitarian reason I can think of for stopping ONLY “illegal” immigration. We can do nothing but support our law and control our growth to prevent this.

    I don’t think Elena and others who side with her, get this.

    So DO NOT put me in the same category as John Tanton, and I will not put any of you in the same category as social or militant terrorists, pathological lawbreakers and pathetic ethnic hatemongers, unless you actively advocate the subversion of US democracy, break any existing laws, exhibit racist behaviors and comments yourselves, or contribute to the growth or support of militant terrorist groups.

    Some on this blog occassionaly cross that line when they get too passionate about defending “illegals”.

  3. Michael

    NGL it was the polite thing to do. I am sorry if you were offended by that post. It is only in-line with how easily everyone else here gets offended by anything or anyone that has an opposing view. I accept your loving counsel.

  4. Michael

    Elena, the majority of proponents of population control are “scientists” and “economists”, deeply concerned by the global poverty it is going to create in 30 years if we don’t do something about it. For the vast majority educated on the issue, it has nothing to do with race. That’s like saying Al Gore is an idiot in bed with “militant tree huggers” and international eco-terrorists, in opposition to the wealth and financial growth of oil companies and business profits, because he believes the scientists are right about global warming and it will eventually harm all of us, by putting us under 9 meters of water when the greenland ice cap completely melts by the year 2040 and average global temperatures are 3 degrees above normal (causing massive extinctions and climte shift toward worldwide deserts.)

    The issue is which side do you take for the greater good?

  5. Michael

    Mackie you are smokin if you don’t understand the physics of “energy”, MAYBE we will get a fusion engine working, but it still won’t fuel our cars. I have hope too, but all the scientists I have talked to say it can’t be done in 30 years and we WILL run out of oil before then.

    The price of a barrel of oil has gone down recently only because of increased Saudi production, profit taking by the commodities brokers waiting to set up the next profit cycle, and the tendency for the American public to get complacent as soon as any “small” decrease in price is seen, once again filling their tanks and driving as before, until the next commodity market price manipulation by institutional brokers and investors.
    Oil won’t disappear overnight is true, it will only increase in price until Saudi oil production peaks around 2010, then decline to run completely out by 2030. THEN it will be gone for good.

  6. NotGregLetiecq

    Offended? Maybe I missed something.

    I only addressed you, Michael, because that post was so uncharacteristically short that I actually read it. It was probably the first post of yours I’ve read in months, and what does it say but “ignore this” which just made me laugh to myself.

    Could resist making a wise crack. I put the smiley face so that YOU wouldn’t be offended.

  7. Michael

    I agrew with many of your other points Mackie, especially the “peak” speculated around 2005. I have information from different sources that can’t exactly estimate Saudi reserves, because they don’t want anyone outside of ARAMCO knowing they have so little and can’t accept mandatory caps on OPEC production quotas.

  8. Michael

    NGL thanks for reading posts. It is hard to have a debate when people ignore everything or everyone they don’t like to read. Fortunately others do read them.

  9. Michael

    NGL, I am almost never offended. I desire honest debate, not emotional brow beating and chest thumping. I am presenting facts and real social politcal issues that need debate and resolution. My views however oppose many here on this blog and they don’t like it. Too bad. Some I think I am able to rationally reach, because they use their heads.

  10. Michael

    Mackie I even agree about the immigrants you mention. I do not however agree that any of them should be “illegal” and allowed to stay. I only support legal immigrants, for all the social and financial issues I mentioned so many, many times before. It is a real problem for us. And it does hurt all of us, in so many widely documented ways.

  11. Elena

    No Emma, ergo the “quotations” around the summary.

  12. DiversityGal

    Off topic, but OMG!!!

    I am watching the RNC on and off. I was completely kidding in an earlier thread when I said they should cue the Kenny Loggins soundtrack upon the mention of the word “maverick” (in reference to both McCain and Palin). Can’t believe it…I turned the RNC on, and the crowd is wiggling to the sweet sound of Kenny Loggins singing “Highway to the Danger Zone!”

    Someone, please hand me the barf bag once I stop laughing…

  13. NotGregLetiecq

    Did the RNC hire any minorities yet? I watched last night and it looked like a Help Save Manassas meeting.

  14. NotGregLetiecq

    Thanks for the summary Michael. I have no problem with you, but your posts have two characteristics I don’t go for. They are wordy. And they are redundant. I read all the other clones, just not you.

  15. DiversityGal

    Somehow the cameras keep finding the few and far between. And people keep telling us that the media is a liberal demon…at least the camera dudes seem to be working for the GOP in St. Paul tonight.

    I will say that my eyes are, for the most part, blinded by the sea of peroxide manes and glittery cowboy hats. Cue the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders! OK, if this comes true, too, I am playing the lottery tomorrow:)

  16. A PW County Resident

    Wow Elena, I thought the same thing when I saw your post about the Allegory. It didn’t sound like your style of writing so I also looked and saw it was someone else’s. I figured that you were too rushed to give attribution. It does happen to people.

    I missed entirely the quotation marks until you put your latest post up.

  17. Moon-howler

    Michael, in regards to Michael, 4. September 2008, 10:07 , I said NO SUCH THING.

    Please do not put words in my mouth. Please correct this error. I am assuming this is a mistake. Otherwise, you are a liar.

  18. Alanna

    Wow, I took some time off today and there seems to be quite a discussion.

    Poor Richard,
    In my mind the connection is very clear – Stirrup works with IRLI, IRLI is the litigation arm of FAIR, FAIR’s founder and current board member is John Tanton. This is this man’s motivation, forget about legal or illegal, it’s an excuse nothing else.

  19. NotGregLetiecq

    So the sad story reveals itself that many of Tanton’s followers do not realize they follow Tanton. It remindes me of that movie “The Wave” again. And also, a tragic term from WWII: the “good German.” There are many people on this blog, Chris Panelle comes to mind first but there are others, who are not eugenicists or supremacists, but truly believed that this new incarnation of the Anti-immigrant Movement was, well, what they said it was, a response to 9/11 in the interest of national security and a protection of “us” vs. “them” with documenation status (not race) being the determining factor.

    This is the information age, but not everyone grew up in the information age, and some seem to have gone a ways without knowing the truth about Tanton, FAIR, IRLI, and Help Save Manassas all being connected. For them I have deep sympathy, not unlike the “good German” who went along with what they were told, some not realizing the true intention behind the movement.

  20. I agree with Alanna. Tanton is using smoke and mirrors to mask his true goal.

    It’s the old switcheroo! AHHH Ya got bamboozled! I tell ya, ya been hoodwinked!

    Only a hopeless buffoon would fall for it!

    Unfortunately…there’s one born every minute…

  21. Elena

    PW Resident,
    I guess instead of quotes I will clearly have to take the additional time to post the link. I don’t treat blogging like a research paper, I guess I should. I figured the quotes would be the dead give away I was not the original author!

  22. Moon-howler

    I am all for population control. It should begin and end by giving women and couples of the world access to safe, effective contraception. Unfortunately, contraception is still a political issue rather than a personal issue. Some churches not only ban it but they also lobby governments, such as our own, to throw up road blocks and limit funding for contraceptives not only in our country but the poor nations of the world.

    Currently the most impoverished nations have the highest birth rate. Contraception has to wrestled from the hands of governments and churches and given to the people if we are going to preserve valuable resources. Very few people want to have unlimited children.

  23. NotGregLetiecq,

    Yes, I agree. The ‘good Germans’ fed the machine until the machine devoured them and their children.

  24. A PW County Resident

    Elena, I didn’t think it was a big thing and was telling you that I missed the quotes too. No big deal to me or to most others.

  25. Elena

    I appreciate it PW! I don’t want it to appear as though I am “stealing” other peoples words 🙂

  26. Elena

    Excellent point Moon-Howler!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  27. Michael, look up a world-population-density map and then talk to me.

    I tried posting the link here but it won’t come through for some reason.

    Most of the world is in the 50-100 person per sq. mile range.

  28. Michael

    KG, this issue is not about how much land we have available per square mile to put people. The critical issue is how much resource is available (oil and food, arable farm land and water), do maintain the current state of WEALTH in the world, and prevent more POVERTY due to overpopulation.

    Overpopulation problems are not because we are running out of space, but becasue we are running out of resources to feed them and energy to create food and transportation to get food to them (in the cities) by 2035.

    You are going down the wrong logic path…think of this as resource science and the limit of how many people our existing natural resources can support.

  29. Michael

    MH yes, I made a mistake: I assumed your intent of the comment and post was to advocate for more numerical racial balancing in the parties “rather than HSM” types.

    you wrote:

    today’s Washington Post entitled, In a More Diverse America, A Mostly White Convention. The article bemoans the fact that miniorities are significantly under-represented on the floor of the convention. In 2004, there were 167 black delegates. In 2008, there are 36 in attendance.

    The Post also reports

    The lack of diversity is out of sync with the demographic changes in the United States. The Census Bureau reported last month that racial and ethnic minorities will make up a majority of the country’s population by 2042 — almost a decade earlier than what the bureau predicted just four years ago. Two-thirds of Americans are non-Hispanic whites, 12.4 percent are black and 14.8 percent are Hispanic, according to 2006 census numbers.

    The Republicans are in trouble. They can be as concerned as they want. Looking at these statistics, white middle class people are not going to own the day much longer.

    How can a party succeed when much of its base is comprised of HSM types? These organizations are not generally made up of Democrats. I am sure we don’t have the only one. The GOP needs to look seriously at the image it projects. This is not rocket science, folks.

    I wrote:

    Even moonhowler wants to argue and support that political “groups” should be numerically balanced, because only black people can take care of black people according to her logic.” This means that we must make sure all groups have no more “children” than the maximum number of “races”, genders, religions and ethnic groups in America, can be equally represented numerically in political groups that are the only ones capable of taking care of themselves.

    I won’t accuse her of it, but if you replace her use of the word’s “the white middle class won’t be in power much longer” with the word black, you would see that such a comment is a racist based statement.

    So few of you replace those words you say, with the flip side (male vs female, black & white, but you equal your racial prejudices with “good and bad” whenever you do this.

    You are incapable of thinking in terms of “individulas” where there is only Lawful and unlawful to seperate “good and bad”. This also is a fundamental principal concept in Democracy, and another reason whi it is being undermine with politcal group, segregation, diversity thinking, and multi-cultural political concepts.

    Almost all of you need to start thinking only in terms of “individuals”

    So yes, the POST assumed that Black people need to be represented more “numerically” in the party, you seemed to echo that opinion by stating “How can a party succeed when much of its base is comprised of HSM types?, implying faily logically from what I read as supporting the notion their is a “numerical” imbalance that needs to be corrected if the PARTY IS to SUCCEED and HSM types = white middle class”. When in fact they do not.

    If people think only in terms of “individual” and not race, gender, religion or ethnic group, THEN ANY PARTY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SUCCEED based only on the issues and not the numbers of different races, gender, religions or ethnic groups in that party.

    This is also why I believe your comment:

    Looking at these statistics, white middle class people are not going to own the day much longer.

    Is a racist based comment that does not consider the politics only from an “individual vote” and “issues” perspective. You make it a racial issue, HSM types = “white middle class” when in fact it is not.

    This is the perverse logic I am continually fighting here, and your comments are just another example of the racial, gender, ethnic, religious political group way of thinking that is destroying our country and our Democracy.

    So I apologize if I quoted the wrong source (You verses the Post), but I think the words used speak for themselves, in which case I do not think you should call me a liar on everything you said yourself.

  30. Moon-howler

    Michael, over-population is caused by there being too many people. Too many people are caused by too reproductive age people having unintended pregnancies and children they cannot feed. I am going down the right path here.

    When one group has something another wants (land, seaports, food, fuel,etc) wars are often fought to obtain what the other wants.

  31. Michael

    Excellent comment and perspective MH 1:54. I very much agree with you there.
    If we are going to reduce world poverty and increase wealth in the world, we must reduce overpopulation, reduce our growth from 6 billion to someting like 1.5 billion by 2035 and get a “sustainable” polulation in line with the available resource to sustain population, especially the impact of running out of those ressources (not running out of land as KG has focused on). THIS IS ONLY ONE or TWO Generations at Most worth of time to solve the problem before it is too late. MANY of you will still be alive in 25-30 years. We can all die, with billions of miles of desert space around us, everyone get the larger picture here regarding “illegal” immigration an its impact of poverty growth on the US in such an declining resource environment?

    The people most concerned by this (an the only ones not gullible or emotional about everything else) are the scientists who have modeled the probabilities.

  32. Michael

    Yes, you are MH, I very much agree with you, we posted at the same time. I was responding to KG first on this issue and SAW YOUR WISDOM on this. You are on the right track. The issue is wealth and poverty, and the effect of overpopulation on both.

  33. Michael

    Yes wars are often fought over resources to prevent poverty. This is why Saddam Hussein, invaded Kuwait, to get the oil reserves (Iraq was down to 1.5 million barrels per day and over their own peak oil curve. This is also why it was a threat to US security (we peaked in 1950 in production), because Saudia Arabia was next (SH had the world’s 4th largest army), and Saudi oil was funding 60% of our oil import (some 10% came from venezuela). Our entire economic WEALTH and FOOD supply sustaining only 360 million people at the level of wealth we have now was in jeopardy. So we helped the Saudi government at Saudi request repel the invasion in 1990.

    THe vast majority of the world (4-5 billion people) are in poverty because they have overpopulated and cannot AFFORD oil. The populations have outstripped their resources.
    China and India want our level of wealth, as do so many other nation’s but they will not have the OIL to achieve it, so will fail (or buy all they can), rapidly depleting the world oil supply by 2020 – 2030 as their populations increase and they drive more cars.

    At that time the entire world will not have solar technology (because it costs too much), and a major food famine will occur in all non-agrarian nations. We will at that time see another resoruce war, of likely very large global scale and likely a Christian-Muslum resource war. Any un-controlled population growth the US has in the next 10-20 years (especially illegal immigration and outrageous birth rates due to religious beliefs) will put us into an even greater poverty deficit as we hit the oil shortage head on, when we have 750-1.5 billion people living in the US. At that time we will see inner city (non-agrarian) poverty levels like we have never seen before).

    The proability of this scenario happening is very high, and scientist who study these models are very concerned, we have not politcally engaged to prevent any further excessive population group, especially in the low skill and low income labor categories. Only the richest nations with the best innovation and industrial/transportation power technology will survive this resource war.

    The Japanese are in the technical lead (Honda corporation specifically).

  34. Michael

    take a good look…this all takes economic power and money to build, more than we can afford to cover the state of california

  35. Michael

    You’ve got to love the brilliance of Japanese engineers, who can go head to head any day with US engineers and often exceed their innovation. Maybe this is because they actually learn something in school (high school and college) besides social engineering and social studies.

    Once again the engineers are going to save and improve live on the planet while the social engineers have only created more poverty, laziness, and “diversity” that ultimately reduces wealth and innovation, by removing market incentive, R&D incentive, and scientific competition, creating lower wages and less product, with less intellectual capital.

    I do have a labor business analytical “model” to use with China, Russian, or Indian partnerships that can prevent this innovation and wealth decline of the US in the face of declining resources, but it is not yet ready for prime time, and it requires “wall mart” style corporate greed to be eliminated. This model does not show any benefit at all from “illegal” immigration, it only shows a decrease in community wealth as a result of “uncontrolled” “illegal” immigration because it reduces the size and quality of the local US regional sales market and experience/skill level of our work force and will as a result of “illegality” use greater and greater tax based and commercial economic resources (oil, gas, water, food) without contributing to innovative production output.

    This is one reason why China and India and Japan are significantly growing in wealth, during a period when the US and Europe are not, in large part caused by the politcal and social turmoil of “illegal” immigration population growth rates and its impact on local community innovation productivity and wealth. The “illegals” are exploiting the labor gap here, the US is exploiting the labor gap there, and the Chinese, Indians and Japanese are digging themselves out of a poverty hole by innovation, skill, education, probibiting overpopulation and “illegal” immigration and they have no one else to exploit as a labor gap. Their only problem will be they will run out of oil before 2035 and before they can achieve this 1.5-2 billion population each leveling of community wealth between the rich and poor, in the same model as the US local community and rich/poor wage deltas.

  36. Moon-howler

    Misunderstanding there Michael. I was more or less pointing out an interesting article in the Post. Obviously if the demographics are changing and the party isn’t representing the new demographics, they are going to run into problems.

    I certainly am not advocating that the Republicans bring in a proportionate number of minorities. I was just observing trends. I have no answers here. They don’t seem to be appealing to very many non white people though. If they want to be around in a few years, they should consider positions and platforms that more people subscribe to. Otherwise they won’t get elected to office. I hope that clarifies.

  37. Michael

    I understand and am sorry for the misundestanding. I do understand what you want (equal justice and equality for all), but racial, gender, religious and ethnic appeal is not the democratic answer, and I do not believe that if demographics are changing the party needs to respond to the demographics. That is race, gender, religious and ethnic group pandering, manipulation and political alignment along boundaries a party should never be aligned on. Either party needs to forget deomgraphics, see all members of their party as “individuals” regardless of race, religion, gender and ethnic group and simply focus on issues that affect all people with laws that are focused on all people the same as individuals.

    We cannot let party politics diverge into group-based facist views, appeal, and race, gender, religion and ethnic group hate-mongering.

    I do have answers here. civil and just ones…

    The way you take care of all people regadless of race is to fairly and justly apply law and social concepts to everyone the same and only as “individuals”. If you do not do this Democracy is undermined, fairness is undermined, prejudice, privilege and discrimmination increases and people are not treated as equal individuals in the party or in the nation’s legal system. I think they are running into problems because they are supporting group based politcal alignments along racial, gender, religious and ethnic group. All parties should appeal to only “individuals”. If they appeal to ANYONE based on race, religion, or ethnic group they are being a racist and facist aligned party. Listen to what you are saying…apply that same concept to how the nazi party appeal to races and ethnic groups in germany, and mussilini in italy, and mao in china, lenin and stalin in Russia and the emperor in Japan.

    I can’t believe you would not see the dangerous error in doing this same thing in a politcal party in a US democracy.

    I don’t want to see another hitler, or stalin or mao, or saddam hussein elected as a US president because their ETHNIC party appeal recruited the greatest numbers into the party. Can you not understand why I am so concerned about this? I have seen it too often in the rest of the world’s ethnic and religious wars and I know how dangerous a party can become in only 10 years, when a “racial, gender, religious of ethnic” group “leader” is elected to the supreme power of the STATE (a conflict or war soon breaks out, and criminal atrocities soon follow against all those not a member of that ethnic, religious or racially based party appeal. It has happened too often in history and in the world today not to absolutely stamp it out when you see it first forming. It is too late once it gains politcal inertia and “ferver” and hatred.

  38. Michael

    The reason the democratic party is “appealing” to non-whites and the republican party is not is because they (the democratic leaders) are appealing to race, gender, and ethnic groups. The Republican party is doing the same only appealing to “religious” groups. Both are incredibly wrong and dangerous for doing that.

    We need leadership in this nation to stop that before its too late and we end up with a “leader” that starts an ethnic or religious war.

  39. hello

    Interesting couple of comments Michael.

  40. Elena

    Do you see a huge clamoring to emmigrate to China? I believe they don’t have an illegal immigration problem because I don’t see the multitudes of people wanting to live under an authortarian dictatorship 🙂

  41. Elena

    The democrats lost their base when Johnson signed the civil rights act. With the stroke of a pen, the black community, saw a democrat as their champion, in the same breath, the whites of the south, saw an enemy. A very odd exchange happened in parties. People have worked very hard, many lost their lives, fighting to be treated with equality and fairness. Were it not for their banding together, who knows when the civil rights movement would have borne its fruits of justice. Do you believe the world is now color blind, gender blind, and religious blind Michael?

  42. DiversityGal


    This may be inflammatory, but I think we already have a leader who is on that track. So many people in this country will tell you that he appealed to them based on his religious beliefs. Unfortunately, I think our current leader and his administration spewed some pretty divisive language over some years, only encouraging some Americans to have that group-against-group mentality of which you speak.

    Also, Michael, I have attended some recent presentations by a couple of speakers on the future of the economy in America. Both speakers claimed that American education should concentrate on developing a creative thinker, rather than a by-the-book technical mind. This is because a lot of these jobs, including computer technology, engineering, even law, are outsourced to overseas workers.

    While it is great to have technical knowledge, there is something to be said for an education that teaches you not only what is rote, but indeed how to be a better thinker. Of course, math and science play a great part in this, but the social sciences/humanities do, too. I think there should be a balance.

    As for the comments about the parties…let’s look at it a different way. Perhaps people feel there is a “tyranny of the majority” in one of the parties (which is a common historical problem for democracies). The other party might appeal to them because they feel that they are truly respected and thought of as individuals by most of the members of that party. Something to consider?

  43. Moon-howler

    Michael, I honestly think you are trying to undo human nature. I might take this a step further and suggest you want to undo mammalian nature. Look at the now famous video on entitled Battle at Kruger. (WARNING: GRAPHIC NATURE SCENES and this video is 8 minutes long)

    If the animal kingdom forms groups to this degree, to protect their own needs and their own, who are we to attempt to fight millions of years of evolutionary development? People also form groups and form governments to fulfill the needs of those groups. (The Pilgrims, the Colonies, etc etc) It is human nature to form laws to suit our needs. We do gather in groups and our laws reflect this. Our national laws are quite different than the laws of a Yukon Eskimo tribe because we have different needs.

    Michael, I think you are just going to have to accept that you are the lone wolf out there. I do not agree with you. That is not to say that I don’t feel some groups are bad. I certainly feel that the evangelical crowd does not meet my needs and I do not want to live under their theocracy. I don’t want to live under the Chinese regime either. I also don’t want to live under a government that favors a group I am not a member of and takes away my rights.

Comments are closed.