Questionable Motives

April 11, 2016

Why do convertees seem to need to vilify atheism?

Filed under: Uncategorized — tildeb @ 11:18 am

(What’s this? A post from Tildeb? Does this indicate the End of Days? Possibly, but my reasons for not posting is because I’ve said much of what I wanted to get out there in the public domain and found that new posts were too often merely the same criticisms pointed at different objects. I found I preferred to comment directly on different sites. But this post is for a new topic and one that I think is worth reading and considering.)

I don’t know. But it’s ubiquitous in all kinds of faith communities. And it pisses me off not just because it’s so dishonest but because my ability to legitimately criticize this lying one-on-one with the guilty party is then moderated out of existence and removed from where it actually needs to be read.

Take Eva’s conversion story for example.

This once reasonable and admittedly agnostic person gives us the Cole’s Notes version of her supposed transition to becoming a Christian but, of course, she can’t do that on its own merits or take responsibility for chucking reasonable skepticism out the window before diving into the faith pool (usually done, in my limited experience, for meeting some emotional need). What is necessary, apparently, is to create a fiction of the depraved former state of non belief and this is usually done by ‘witnessing’ some highly negative and derogatory references to the previous and deplorable state of being an atheist, of making up lies to describe the atheism one has left behind.

This is what Eva has done:

See, I was an atheist. And not a nice, breezy atheist who doesn’t believe in God but it completely happy for those who do, like my husband. I was an angry opinionated atheist, and I really didn’t like religion. Especially Christians. The God Delusion was my bible, and I was about as intolerant and fundamentalist as you can get. This started early; in Grade 3 my best friend and I staged a revolt and refused to attend Scripture, where a nice elderly volunteer woman got us to colour in pictures of Jesus every week. We sat outside and felt superior and enlightened. And I’m sorry to say that that is a pattern that continued for the next 30 or so years.

 

Having followed her writings for years, I am aware of no such intolerant and fundamentalist ‘pattern’. Quite the opposite, in fact. She was almost always polite and considerate to believers and non believers alike. Of course, from her blog title am quite aware of the agnosticism she admittedly had. So, when I wrote a comment to the above conversion story directly criticizing her for doing this seemingly mandatory smearing of atheism, she then did what so many religious bloggers do: exercised knee-jerk censorship and removed my ‘offending’ comment (plus ban me from any further commenting apparently).

That, in a nutshell, is what religious belief does: the method is to impose a belief on reality and pretend it’s descriptive of it rather than dare to allow reality itself to arbitrate beliefs about it.

The thing is, I don’t mind being banned by those dimwitted lightweights and intellectually dishonest and intolerant bloggers who can’t handle legitimate criticism or legitimate differences of opinion. They are not worth my time.

What I don’t get is how a once reasonable person open to receiving contrary comments and even criticism falls so quickly, so effortlessly, so righteously, into using lies, self-loathing PRATT, and a form of fiction to knowingly and falsely describe his or her  previous atheist life and then turn to the bludgeon of banning of any contrary commentary to make themselves appear reborn in meekness and humbleness wrapped in their newfound faith. Of course, the religious allies come out of the woodwork to ‘welcome’ their ‘rescued’ brother or sister but nary a one actually questions the truth value of the fictional anti-atheist narrative.

Not one. Ever… and I read this kind of conversion story many times (usually but not always related to some non believing person having to become a person of faith in order to gain sexual access with a partner who is a believer).  Vilifying atheism seems to be just the ticket to acceptance without any added concern for what’s true. In fact, I read it so often that I am beginning to think it’s like a requirement.

It’s not just tedious: it needs to come with an associated cost.

Vilifying atheists and atheism by these convertees speaks to the inherent dishonesty that seems to accompany a mental transition to become a religious believer later in life and in some weird way grants a level of ‘street cred’ to these recent convertees. Over and over again, I see their fictional narratives recycled and used by other religious people to support the ongoing, pernicious, and intentionally dishonest vilification of atheists.

Hence, the need for this post. This kind of religious deceit needs to if not stop then at least be challenged and loudly criticized.

A little dose of Truth to Power.

Sure, convertees can ban people like me and think their secret maliciousness is safe from being exposed, from being criticized for the lying it is. But I am not going to go quietly into this good night of religious moderation but use such banning as the prime reason, my motivation, for exposing it to a wider audience and link it directly to the person responsible. Avoid being responsible and honest on your blog all you want but don’t expect me to go along with this charade and stay quiet.

The offending author will receive a pingback from this site and so will know that this is what will happen when you choose to stop allowing me to comment truthfully on your site: I will introduce your deceit and dishonesty to a wider audience because vilifying atheists and atheism for your own selfish gain and shutting us down on a site where you do this shouldn’t be a benefit, shouldn’t be something only you can control. Exercising such dishonesty should earn just the opposite: wider exposure of what it is you’re willing to forego – your intellectual honesty –  to further yourself at the expense of others.

If nothing else, such wider exposure should should cost the person in reputation… cost the person who is so willing and even eager to harm the reputation of others on the basis of some fictionalized version of atheism.

Put another way, one should reap what one sows.

 

 

Advertisements

35 Comments »

  1. I liken it to former smokers who go completely anti-smoking. The pendulum swings too far and meaning is found in the extreme opposite position. Perhaps it’s just a peculiar personality trait?

    Now, what is PRATT?

    Comment by john zande — April 11, 2016 @ 12:21 pm | Reply

    • I think it’s a common tactic and not a personality issue, John, because it almost always follows the conversion and is (almost, I presume) always fully accepted as if unquestionably true.

      I understand the zealotry… but, as you say, that usually involves a 180* swing. (Eva in this case has been moving in that direction for many, many years.) And one can paint the previous position by highlighting the negatives and promoting the new one with positives. That I get.

      But what I don’t get is the vilification aspect of real people in real life that relies on being intentionally dishonest.

      Again, I can understand the allure to shade to make one’s self look good, but when one is supposedly attaining a new and higher ‘moral’ authority from submitting to some god’s will and divinely sanctioned rules, then such lying really should be the very antithesis one is supposedly escaping. It shouldn’t be the go-to tactic by so many fervently and newly minted Christians who claim to have a pipeline to the creator of the universe, a divine agency who – oh, BTW and coincidently – just so happens to have a PERSONAL interest in the newbie and who has supposedly sent out a special invitation to join the Select! The very last thing one should want to do if this were indeed the case (as is so often reported) is to lie… knowing that the biblical god tends to take a rather dim view of such tactics… one that supposedly endangers the very soul for eternity!

      PRATT is a handy double meaning. The English ‘prat’ or vernacular ‘pratt’ (an incompetent, stupid, or foolish person; an idiot), and the internet meme PRATT, short for a Point Refuted A Thousand Times.

      Comment by tildeb — April 11, 2016 @ 1:01 pm | Reply

      • Ah, Point Refuted. I was giggling thinking you were calling Kevin (or was it Irish?) a prat, with a double T for effect.

        Think identity creation. This woman is molding a new identity. She’s not used to this new skin yet so she’s irrationally defending it, defending it being offensive to the former.

        And that’s your daily dose of JZ’s Amateur Psychology Hour.

        Comment by john zande — April 11, 2016 @ 1:07 pm

  2. Wow. A post. JZ has a fair point though. Aren’t all converts or deconverts all the more zealous?

    Comment by roughseasinthemed — April 11, 2016 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

    • Yes, I think so, but how do all the rest just go along with this shite?

      Comment by tildeb — April 11, 2016 @ 1:02 pm | Reply

  3. I agree with you completely on this, Tildeb. ‘Liars for Jesus’ wear many hats and the more I read their tales, the more I think their willful-ignorance-elevated-to-moral-superiority needs to be exposed.

    (not sure why I didn’t get notification for this new entry but I’m blaming it on my son, who ‘updated’ my laptop; good thing I’ve got offspring to blame my one of my deficiencies on) 😉 Thanks to Mak, who featured your blog entry!

    Comment by carmen — April 11, 2016 @ 2:59 pm | Reply

  4. Oh crikey. I just came over to leave a comment, just in case you dont get a notification. I reinstated your comment and have apologised for deleting it. Its the first time that I have ever deleted a comment, or banned someone, and I think that I over reacted. Im sorry that you took it so much to heart, although your readers must pleased that it finally got you to post again!

    Comment by Eva — April 12, 2016 @ 3:10 am | Reply

    • Yeah tildeb, sorry you took Eva’s lying and dishonesty and intentional smearing of your non-belief to heart so much. I’m sorry you took it to heart when you called me out for being a liar, and I reacted by censoring and banning you.
      Wow. What an apology.
      Who says religious belief (in this case, Christianity) makes people do bad things?!

      Comment by Ashley — April 13, 2016 @ 9:10 am | Reply

      • Notice Ashley that my criticism of her false portrayal of atheism and her false attitudes as an atheist towards believers has gone without rebuttal. Eva has not addressed this but, instead, has tried to repaint my criticism as a reflection of MY motivations rather than HER deceit and false witnessing. This failure to address the actual criticisms is also a standard avoidance tactic by believers all too willing to vilify others and go along with the vilification that few seem to take issue with.

        Comment by tildeb — April 13, 2016 @ 9:53 am

  5. Welcome back, Tildeb. After reading Eva’s post and her comments, I gather she’s not that knowledgeable about the bible, the very foundation of her belief system. Neither does she seem knowledgeable about the deity she’s chosen, Yahweh. I also agree with what you said in your comment on her post — that she’s apparently using Christianity to meet a psychological need.

    As far as the atheist comments go, it came across as sensationalism in an effort to score points with the Christian community. Her testimony just seemed convoluted.

    Comment by N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ — April 12, 2016 @ 11:15 am | Reply

    • sensationalism in an effort to score points with the Christian community

      Bingo.

      Comment by john zande — April 12, 2016 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

    • Yes, I agree. But it’s the vilifying of others on false grounds for purely selfish reasons that I find so annoying… the others in the case of so many convertees being atheists and atheism. What Eva spouts are lies, intentional deceptions, and hasn’t the moral fortitude (or hasn’t been able to summon it yet) to admit responsibility and apologize for being purposefully bigoted. That’s why I thought ‘outing’ such insincere people should become commonplace. Furthermore, the acceptance of such bigotry by others in the faith community should also be highlighted as the reason for non believers like me to have to point it out.

      Comment by tildeb — April 12, 2016 @ 2:11 pm | Reply

  6. Tildeb,

    I can’t comment on that thread any more so I’ll reply here instead

    “…Eva has not addressed this but, instead, has tried to repaint my criticism as a reflection of MY motivations rather than HER deceit and false witnessing. This failure to address the actual criticisms is also a standard avoidance tactic by believers all too willing to vilify others and go along with the vilification that few seem to take issue with.”

    Standard Operating Procedure

    Step 1) Intentionally misrepresent any agnostic/atheist/secular viewpoint to start the smear. Do your best to generalize.
    Step 2) When/if called out on it, blame any offence taking/misunderstanding on everyone but yourself – point out that the person reading the aforementioned misrepresentative garbage and lies has likely “read it the wrong way” or “taken it too much to heart” and that they just need to lighten up.
    Step 3) If you must admit to doing something wrong/unethical/immoral, you may but are not obliged to back pedal first. Then offer a half hearted apology and make sure you put lots of qualifiers on it. So many qualifiers in fact that it becomes essentially meaningless.
    Step 4) At all costs, avoid discussing the actual reason for the calling out (i.e. the actual lies/misrepresentation/etc). NEVER, EVER admit that you might have lied or misrepresented other people’s view points – if the conversation doesn’t end there and the other person tries to continue it – go back and repeat steps 2 and/or 3.
    Step 5) If the other person still tries to continue talking about it you can a) ban him/her if it’s your own forum or b) stop replying if it’s a forum not controlled by you.

    Additional tactics – to be used at the discretion of the religious person
    A) Don’t be afraid to let your sense of superiority shine through. It’s ok to talk in a condescending way to the atheist/agnostic/secularist. Your reasoning skills and grasp on logic is far superior to those guys. After all, you’ve got the mystery of the entire universe all figured out. What the hell do these guys/gals know?! Don’t forget, you have the moral high ground. You know where morals come from and who gave them to you. These guys are just base animals that would kill you at the drop of a hat because they don’t have anyone to answer to.
    B) Feel free to tell the atheist/agnostic/secular person that their immortal soul is in grave danger because they haven’t accepted the One True God as their lord and savior. Don’t be afraid to tell them that they are going to hell – hopefully that will scare them into doing the right thing. After all, you really are just doing them a favour. However, some of them are so wicked and evil that they won’t listen to you. That’s because they are devil worshippers. There’s nothing you can do about that. Don’t worry, God will fix their wagon in due time.

    I think that about sums up most debates/discussions/arguments I have ever had with almost every single religious person on this and similar blogs. Hell, even steps 1 and 2 can even be applied to many of the “I’m an atheist, but…” crowd.

    RELIGION POISONS EVERYTHING.

    Happy birthday Hitch.

    Comment by Ashley — April 13, 2016 @ 2:32 pm | Reply

  7. Ha! I just went over to Eva’s site and read your exchange (this was AFTER I made the Standard Operating Procedure post) – looks like she followed steps 1 through 4 quite perfectly.

    I forgot to add this one though!
    Step 6) Turn it around on the person accusing you of spreading lies and misrepresentative garbage. Tell them they’re an “angry atheist” who needs to “get over themselves”. Remember – this is NOT your fault. You didn’t do anything wrong. They’re just being hateful.

    She’s certainly an inspiration to her fellow Christians.
    What a piece of work.

    Comment by Ashley — April 13, 2016 @ 3:43 pm | Reply

  8. […] Over on The Aspirational Agnostic Eva has posted what was essentially the testimony she made to her church about her conversion to Christianity: Hopefully this will be the last time I talk about being an atheist. The post has been criticised both in the comments section of the blog and also wider afield such as here and here. […]

    Pingback by Misunderstanding a message | Another Spectrum — April 14, 2016 @ 10:34 am | Reply

  9. I tried to leave a comment on Eva’s blog pointing out why I felt that Tildeb was explicably irritated by the intentional smearing of atheism, and the implied association between atheism, the god delusion and her anger and intolerance. Unfortunately, it appears to have been deleted and I made the mistake of not copying it as proof of my posting. I am not surprised by that in the slightest though, since it is step 5 in the S.O.P.

    Comment by Ashley — April 14, 2016 @ 3:57 pm | Reply

    • I take it all back. My comment has been posted. My apologies.

      Comment by Ashley — April 15, 2016 @ 8:08 am | Reply

  10. I’ve made two comments on Eva’s blog in the past 3 hours and still they have not appeared. Banned again, I wonder?

    Specifically, I’ve pointed out that her ‘before’ atheism preceded the publication of the God Delusion and so her reference to it as her bible seemingly responsible for her intolerance and fundamental atheism is clearly a lie that she will not retract. This reference continues the lie that Dawkins and his book – and, by extension, the movement of New Atheism generally to challenge religious privilege in the public domain (especially exempting claims that are not true from legitimate criticism… ahem) – are source material for some atheists’ anger and intolerance against religious people. This is indisputably a lie.

    So when other commentators – believers and non believers alike trying to be ‘nice’ and appear tolerant and respectful to the author by trying to find a middle ground between what’s true and what isn’t – come along and fall into the trap of going along with this lie, relegating it to be of some small concern better left unchallenged, see it as nothing more than a literary device, one that doesn’t really besmirch anyone (Dawkins and New Atheists exempted by fiat apparently) then what they are in effect doing is giving cover and sanction for this kind of lying, this kind of maligning, this kind of intentional deceit. When they go along with criticizing those willing to stand up against it, meekly accepting this deceit for such vital interests as ‘tone’ and politeness, criticize the motivations of those willing to challenge this kind of pernicious deceit, then what does that tell you about this meme’s seductive power?

    The lie is now so common about Dawkins and The God Delusion that many people no longer even question its truth value but will question anyone who questions it!

    That’s the trap many appear eager to fall into.

    What does this willingness to go along with a lie say about the intellectual integrity of these later commentators who can be so easily seduced on the one hand while giving passing consent to tolerate the deceit itself as if it were merely a trivial and subjective reference and even go out of their way to make it more permissible on the one hand while criticizing any criticism of its lack of truth value on the other?

    Think about that.

    Look, it’s time for more people of integrity to stop mewling over those willing to lie about New Atheism, lie about its source for nasty behaviour by its practitioners – behaviour and attitudes labeled as angry, intolerant, and fundamentalist – as if the association were true. It’s not. Its fiction, an urban myth, an intentional deceit when challenged for its truth value but still held as if true. It’s time more of us stop accepting this kind of deceit, this slow spreading of theistic bullshit, in the name of something else, something we want to feel good about. When all is said and done, that ‘something else’ – no matter how satisfyingly rationalized it may be – looks identical in effect to the kind of religious apologetics that bears false witness against real people in real life and increases the potential for real harm be done to them.

    Comment by tildeb — April 15, 2016 @ 10:49 am | Reply

    • Ditto for me. I left a response about 3 hours ago that has yet to be published – so perhaps we are back to step 5? Who knows how many other people may have posted something similar to what you’ve said, only to have it deleted? I just posted this on her blog but I doubt it will get published:

      “In my mind I disliked Christians, they made me irritated by their stupidity, and I was an atheist because of this” (Her response to my initial post)
      That is called bigotry, not atheism. A person is an atheist for 1 reason only – because they don’t believe in god. If you disliked all Christians because you found the ones you knew to be stupid, then that makes you bigoted against Christians. It has nothing to do with Atheism. There are many Jews, Buddhists and Muslims who dislike Christians for many, many reasons. None of them have a single solitary thing to do with atheism. Disliking a group of people one finds to be stupid does not make anyone stop believing in god.

      If you’ve looked at her follow up post “The Debrief”, it contains a very polished, fictionalized version of events, absolving herself of any wrong doing of course, and writing “But what threw me the most was the fact that the little group of biting, acerbic, pseudo intellectuals that spoke so dismissively of me and my life in other comment sections…used to be me.”
      See? That USED to be her – but not any more. Now that she’s figured out which god is the correct one and the correct way to worship him, she can be much less fundamentalist and less intolerant than her old nasty atheist self. Of course, none of the biting, acerbic, pseudo-intellectualism can be attributed to her atheism. Don’t you even dare think that that statement implied something to that effect!

      It’s good that you point out her intentional misrepresentations, smears, lies and deceit, but getting her to recognize or acknowledge it, is a task I am afraid that you will never accomplish. As she has proved something I have observed more times than I can count – Religious people will say ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING in defense of their position. To them, it’s not lying if you really believe it. She done found Jesus and the REAL bible (not the Richard Dawkins one) and hallelujah, she’s miraculously transformed into this wonderful, humble, accepting, tolerant person. (again, clearly, obviously no slight against Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion or atheism)

      Anywho, now she has the likes of Colorstorm, UnkleE and other brain dead idiots to fawn over her equally moronic musings “Searching for a God that is playing hard to get”. How profound. Ignorance truly is bliss I guess. Lucky girl.

      Comment by Ashley — April 15, 2016 @ 12:05 pm | Reply

      • Well, your comment has appeared on Eva’s site but my responses today? Eighteen hours and counting. And it’s not like they went into moderation; they simply never appeared, which usually means the administrator has activated a block. Nothing says tolerance like banning.

        She can dish it but she can’t take it, apparently… not too sensitive to take the time and make the effort to smear me for my tone but far too sensitive in her fragile state from having to defend her deceitfulness and spend so much effort – and with some success with the credulous – to fool others into believing she didn’t mean to smear anyone with her linking her anger, intolerance, and atheistic fundamentalism to anything like the God Delusion… even though she wrote exactly that. Why, it’s like the whole paragraph has almost but not quite disappeared from her good intentions… if only I would shut up about what she actually wrote and just go away.

        Poor dear… being called out on her lying but it is just too harsh to tolerate… now that she’s such a tolerant and happy reformed believer. Good grief. And people who should know better buy into this bullshit!

        Comment by tildeb — April 15, 2016 @ 10:43 pm

      • My second comment has been posted, but the one I made prior to that seems to have disappeared unfortunately. I have reposted again – my comment is in moderation, so hopefully it makes it through. I have to do something I loathe – self-censor in fear that if I ask a certain question or phrase a question incorrectly, that it’ll get deleted. Seems awfully strange to have to talk to someone in such a manner who claims to have jettisoned intolerance now that she’s become a Christian. It’s almost like,,,,it’s hypocritical or something….

        Comment by Ashley — April 18, 2016 @ 8:51 am

      • and BTW, yes you have been banned by Eva. For now at least

        “Im sorry to say that I’ve actually stopped him from commenting here any more. I know that this will be seen by some as ‘Eva cant handle his truth bombs’, but at this point I think Tildeb needs to step back and I fear he wont do this except by my actions.”
        That’s her talking with Barry.

        Comment by Ashley — April 18, 2016 @ 1:06 pm

  11. “I just hope that people realise that not ALL atheists are angry and intolerant likeTildeb and Ashley. Most atheists are good, kind and reasonable people. I should have made that point in my original post. Oh, hang on…”

    Anyone is welcome to reread her paragraph up there in my post and look again at what she says here. More deceit.

    Yes, maintaining the criticism that Eva’s ongoing lie that New Atheism articulated in the God Delusion has a ‘fundamental’ nastiness associated with it but ABSOLUTELY NOT intolerance and bigotry, we are to believe by those who imply it does – just some other principles of nastiness many people willingly accept yet are unable to articulate – is so very intolerant. And it must be defined as ‘angry’, of course, because it must be so to continue challenging the good intentions of the person using deceit to make themselves look better as a convertee. That’s why I have been banned not once, which is usual when I confront this lie, but twice for continuing to do so! It’s all about the tone you see, while the importance of truth value fades somewhere into the distance and of far, far lesser concern.

    Eva and her posse of mewling apologists and atheist ‘butters’ seem unable to grasp the scope of irony in action in defense of the Big Lie. Who is demonstrating intolerance, the nasty New Atheists or the faitheists? And look at how many people complain to Eva about use of banning that demonstrates intolerance? None of the apologists. And that’s a clue… about the intellectual integrity of those willing to go along with the idea that New Atheism contains fundamental intolerance and bigotry: they care less about what’s true and more about appearances of tolerance than upholding the principle itself. The shallowness is staggering.

    Comment by tildeb — April 20, 2016 @ 10:16 am | Reply

    • Yeah, I read that earlier this morning. It’s like I said earlier dude – Christians will say ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING to defend their actions. If you have no regard for the truth in the first place, there’s not a whole lot that anyone can do about it. Just expose it I guess – not that it will do anything with her fellow sheep of course, but maybe those who look into the matter in detail can maybe see her for what she really is.

      Comment by Ashley — April 20, 2016 @ 12:04 pm | Reply

  12. I don’t know anything about Eve, and I’ve not read her blog. I can guess based on my experiences as an evangelical, though.
    Christians have been redeemed from [fill in the blank~in Eve’s case, atheism]. They’re required to have a testimony otherwise the brethren and sisteren won’t take them seriously. The “testimony” must really illustrate how sinful and broken they were. If it was just “meh” atheism then that wouldn’t be at all inspiring would it? So, the embellishment begins. It’s the same throughout faith, reformed alcoholics, whores, thieves, murderers, all have a story and it ain’t pretty.

    Comment by persedeplume — April 3, 2017 @ 9:31 pm | Reply

    • yes, I think that’s pretty obvious… to everyone except those who like to hear this kind of story. It should have it’s own genre in the blogosphere.

      Comment by tildeb — April 3, 2017 @ 10:15 pm | Reply

  13. Tildeb, I would not generalize all religions on this one. Christians and Muslims have the need to evangelize/force their beliefs. As you saw on Jewish website, nobody forces or try to convert anybody there. I would also guess that Buddhist and Sikh don’t convert people. I have been around many, and it is not a requirement from their faith.

    Also, look at her quote, it seems that she rebelled from Christianity in a way or another. This looks mostly like a rebellion against her parents who might have been too strict on her. She wanted freedom and atheism was the answer. Now that she was older, it seems that she was easier to convince due to the guilt that she had from her youth to have leave her “savior” for the wrong reason…

    Comment by RT — May 5, 2017 @ 8:46 am | Reply

    • Remember, the theme of the post was about vilifying disbelief. And I think that’s ubiquitous.

      Comment by tildeb — May 5, 2017 @ 1:38 pm | Reply

      • Maybe it’s just me… I don’t vilify disbeliever. Nobody will be really sure before they die. But that does not mean most think like me…

        Comment by RT — May 5, 2017 @ 1:53 pm

      • RT – how on earth will they know AFTER they die??

        Comment by Carmen — May 5, 2017 @ 2:08 pm

      • If there is indeed a god, you should see him. If Tildeb is right and there is none, then you might realize it that you are slowly dying and that there is nothing… or maybe the light just turn of and that’s it.

        Comment by RT — May 5, 2017 @ 2:12 pm

      • See him – how?

        Comment by Carmen — May 5, 2017 @ 2:14 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: