“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” – John 3:16

As hard as it is to believe, even someone as amazing and talented as I can be distracted by ego. I may have greater humility, but I also have more things to be proud of.

Truth is more important than liberty. I believe in both, and in the supermajority of real-world scenarios they will always be on the same side. However, if there ever were a conflict between the two, truth is supreme.

Thinking can get you into trouble. Not thinking can also get you into trouble.

Knowing when to think and when not to think requires thinking.

My boss doesn’t pay me enough to think. Neither does he pay me enough not to think.

For some people, thinking is as natural as breathing – and just as difficult to stop.

There are three kinds of libertarians: moralist, pragmatic, and de facto.

Moralist libertarians always believe in liberty because infringing on the people’s rights is morally wrong.

Pragmatic libertarians might be unswayed by the moral argument, but support liberty because centralized government programs are ineffective or counterproductive.

De facto libertarians might be unswayed by the pragmatic argument, but support liberty today because the current set of government officials cannot be trusted.

Bad people will always find a way to pervert the best of systems. Good people will always find a way to redeem the worst of systems. The difference between good people and bad people is nothing other than behavior, and behavior can change in a moment.

Evildoers might not believe God is watching, ready to deliver justice, but what I can’t understand is why they never consider that aliens might be watching. Considering how close we are as a species to developing space travel, and our track record of abusing each other, I’d think that any aliens would be watching us very closely.

I trust the science. I do. It’s the scientists I don’t trust.

The real adventure is better than the film or novel and the real girl better than the dream one.

It is better to hear an ugly truth than a pretty lie. It is better still to hear a pretty truth.

Who is the greater threat? The one experiencing anxiety and revenge ideation – who might, maybe, perhaps one day shoot up the school? Or the ones who have caused the anxiety by actually engaging in repeated verbal and physical abuse, slander, psychological manipulation, threats, and harassment?

Who is the greater threat? The politician who runs on a promise to remove the means of self-defense from those who might need it most on mere hearsay by the decision of a single government agent, with no oversight or way to appeal the decision until afterwards? Or the patriotic citizen at home who grumbles that someone ought to do “whatever it takes” to stop that politician from winning?

Saying I can’t have an opinion on abortion because I’m not female is like saying I can’t have an opinion on the holocaust because I’m not a member of the Nazi party.

Without life, there is no liberty, no pursuit of happiness, no free speech, no right to bear arms, no right to vote, no free health care, no affordable housing, and nothing else. If the government provides anything at all whatsoever, it follows logically that it should first protect us from being killed. Since the role of government is to protect the weak and the innocent more than it is to protect the strong and the guilty, and since there exist no citizens more vulnerable or more innocent than those living in the womb, it follows logically that if the government protects the lives of anyone at all, it should first protect the unborn. It’s only fair.

Bipartisanship is not always good. Often, bipartisanship is when the donkeys eat all the grass, the elephants eat all the shrubs, and nothing is left behind for the sheep.

When different media outlets report different versions of the same story, who is to say which is the conspiracy theory and which is the coverup? Which is the dogma and which is the heresy? Who is mainstream and who is fringe?

Some claim that it is within the proper role of the courts to settle disputes between the legislative and executive branches, but then who is it that settles disputes between the courts and another branch? Who is it that defines the proper role of the court?

Some claim it is within the proper role of the courts to decide the meaning of the constitution even when it applies to restrictions on government power, but what then restricts a part of that same government (the courts) from deciding the constitution to mean whatever it pleases, granting itself unlimited power?

Some claim that the courts interpret the laws for us because sometimes we cannot agree on the meaning of the laws, but if we cannot agree on the meaning of the law, how can we then agree on the meaning of the rulings of the court?

If you want something done right, you should do it yourself. If you still want others to do it, it is your responsibility to make sure they understand how you want it done, not theirs. This is no less true just because you call yourself a government. If you want people to follow the laws, they must be both comprehendible and not numbered so many that they cannot be remembered. If you expect people to make use of a lawyer, it is your responsibility to hire one for them at your expense. If you want people to pay their taxes, it is your responsibility to do the paperwork.

There is no amount of punishment possible to deter someone from killing or injuring another when they perceive it as self-defense. When under the threat of bodily harm, what the law or the community will think of one’s actions later is the last thing on one’s mind. More punishment won’t work.

Why is it that wearing the image on your shirt of a violent communist revolutionary like Che Guevara is considered first-amendment-protected speech, but wearing nothing but your own body – made in the image of God himself – is considered so offensive it must be made illegal?

Lips are the primary organs used in kissing, an activity commonly associated with romantic entanglements, yet they are not considered sexual organs. Hands may caress, and eyes may gaze, but neither hands nor eyes are considered especially sexual either. In contrast, breasts – the primary purpose of which is to nourish the young – are considered “sexual” organs.

There live among us those who dislike chocolate, or coffee, or pickles, but we accept them and understand that we all have different tastes. There live among us people who are unusually afraid of snakes or spiders, but we recognize that we are all a bit uncomfortable around animals we can’t control. There are those among us who are creeped out by perfectly innocent clowns, but we turn around and blame the clowns for being creepy. Then there are those among us that are uncomfortable around those who openly discuss or practice homosexuality. These people are derided as hateful and prejudiced, their businesses boycotted, their jobs terminated, and their opinions censored.

Very few suggest that divorce should be illegal, but many recognize that a union carrying an expiration date from its inception is not a true marriage. Very few suggest that promiscuity among consenting adults should be illegal, but many recognize that a union of more than two individuals is not a true marriage either. Very few suggest that homosexual relationships should be illegal, but when it comes to whether homosexual unions are true marriages, we cannot seem to agree. It is one of the great debates of our time. Explaining the inherently heterosexual nature of romantic love to a homosexual is like explaining color to a blind man, except of course, that when insisting on the existence of color, nobody ever accuses us of being blindophobic.

Pain and sex are opposites. Domination and love are opposites. They could not possibly be any more different. Whips, gags, and chains are what you use on those you dislike, not those you like. Kissing, hugging, and making babies are things you do with those you like, not those you dislike.

We don’t need more of Jesus or more of God’s power in our lives; we already have it all. We only need less of ourselves.

The older I get, religion for me becomes less about the assurance that God will protect and provide and more about the realization that there is nothing in this world worth holding onto anyways.