Archive for March, 2014

The Dangers of Atheism, Narcissism and Secular Science

March 29, 2014 4 comments

I’ll try to make this short and to the point. Atheism is a dangerous mind set because it is a delusional state of mind in which a person has convinced themselves that morality comes not from a God who may send you to suffer forever in Hell if break his morality/by disobeying his commandments/laws, but from man, and is therefore something that is not permanent and in which there is no danger of eternal suffering for disobeying. I can give all kinds of horrific examples of how then an atheist could then justify what most people would call psychopathic behavior. As in what most people would call evil acts committed without showing any guilt over it. I say “most people”, because most people are not atheists, unless you count Buddhists of the East, though Buddhists at least have some sort of commandments, but how well they adhere to it, who knows:

Clear examples of atheism leading to murderous psychopathic behavior were given by the atheist leaders Stalin, Hitler (who, being a clever atheist, used religion to mask his agenda of subjugating everyone), Mao and perhaps Pol Pot, whose atheism though not stated is perhaps evidenced by his complete lack of promoting any religion. The murders of those atheists combined exceed the murders of the Catholic cult for the past 1000 years. In just 100 years those atheists murdered or killed over 50 million people. There are about 300 million people in the United States, imagine if 50 million of them were suddenly wiped out by some disease spread by an atheist biologist going around the country releasing his virus into water supplies.

I met one narcissist atheist who regularly trolls the internet – he’s a stalker of mine, who claimed that it wasn’t the fault of atheism, but communism. In other words: just ignore that they were atheists and focus only on communism. Talk about “intellectually dishonest”. Just imagine the field day atheists would have if a communist Christian had murdered 50 million people. They’d ignore the communism and trump up, “He believed in those horrible ten commandments!” Actually no they wouldn’t, because they conveniently ignore the ten commandments, knowing they are good, at least instinctively, so would more likely say with pretentiousness, “See what good religion is?! It lead to such a great loss, oh the tragedy. Religion is the cause of all wars.” In other words they’d be vague, ignoring specifics, pretending all religions are the same, ignoring what type of Christian this person was (meaning failing to examine if he was someone who misinterpreted the Bible and had a very warped understanding of it, or simply didn’t care if he was disobeying it). Most atheists I encounter off or on the net are either mentally ill or are very stupid and ignorant and think in this way. “Religion is to blame” is their excuse for their hypocritical behavior. Kind of like saying, “Religion made me do it/hurt that person.” Consider the irony of that excuse! An atheist is more likely to blame religion for their evil behavior than a religious person is likely to blame their religion I imagine.

People with the permanent mental disorder known as narcissistic personality disorder seem more likely to be atheists than of some traditional type of Christian religion like Catholicism, Lutheranism or the Calvinistic branches. That is because those religions teach that God’s commandments should be obeyed and worshiped. Catholicism however is polytheistic in that if adds gods to be worshiped of a sort, like Mary, angels and so called saints. Though they deny it it’s clear they do and in their “Catholic Bible” the commandment about not making or bowing down to idols has been removed. Consider the blasphemy of doing that. The Bible also says that anyone altering Scripture like that has a curse put on them. A narcissist DOES NOT want to worship anyone, but to have himself worshiped or rather have whatever he says don.

A narcissist is permanently bent towards an evil disposition, and so if he is also an atheist, becomes a criminal-minded person. Such people, horrifically, can rise all the way to leadership of countries with millions of people and have: Stalin, Hitler, Mao and possibly others. It seems impossible to many I imagine, that people who would seem to be so mentally unhealthy could gain such power, but it is possible because there can be those among them that have just enough patience, cleverness, know-how when it comes to lying to pull it off. And consider that it is probably not the hardest thing in the world to form a gang which can grow in power through theft, murder, stalking, bullying and technology, including through gun use till it takes over and takes a part of a large country. Consider also the “psychopath/serial killer” next door, who by pretending to be a normal good person by his behavior and words, imitating those he or she instinctively senses are the opposite of them, manages to blend in, while secretly, sometimes when alone or with a partner they think or is like themselves, tortures or murders others in darkness or isolation from the rest of civilization.

Some might think that in a world where governments are plagued with narcissists and psychopaths, that the world can still get by advancing till it weeds them out, and they look to the present state of the world as an example I imagine. For example Hitler was eventually gotten rid of, even if he did manage to escape to Indonesia, and George Bush Jr. was not elected again, and Popes given to murdering their opposition are no longer in power, seemingly, and the Dalai Lama (who was part of a long line of very evil oppressors in Tibet) was ousted by China (yet many Tibetans want him back!). But I think rather than it isn’t that such evil has been done away with or is being done away with, or being coped with successfully, I think what has happened is that more clever narcissists have come to power, ones who having studied history, seeing what keeps a person in power or not, have learned how to mask even better their evil personality and evil intent. A certain clever narcissist in power of the most powerful country today works in a very stealthy and slick way to pick apart what he personally does not like, which besides being the world in general, is mostly those who are for capitalism, a republic and Christianity.

A major problem in attempting to eliminate narcissism and atheism is that such people have already corrupted many others with their beliefs, including theists, so much so that they still support them even when they do great evils. For example Hitler, Mao, the Dalai Lama and I’d bet Stalin, all still have many supporters. It’s similar to how the ancient Jews under Egypt’s oppressive rule chose in their evil disposition to lose patience in their time of freedom WHILE SUFFERING to then, nonsensically, want to go back under a time of oppression WHILE FEELING GOOD, like eating after doing work, and so on. And many see the teaching of evolutionism and Big Bangism as having freedom them from oppression (and perhaps they instinctively sense that those teachings are what helped bring to power such evil leaders), and think that if they are gotten rid of, that “bad religion” would come back into “the schools” and “brainwash” everyone into being “slaves” again (slaves of what?) or technologically backwards (as if ipods, phones, cars and telescopes to play with didn’t exist because of Moses, Christ and the apostle Paul – but it’s disobedience to God that hinders technological progress actually). So, many people suffering now in America, Russia, Tibet or China, due to their poverty or being oppressed by current leaders desire to go back to an even worse time with worse leaders, who they rationalize as being better because, “At least they did such and such like Putin/Obama etc. and did not do such and such like those men.” But they ignore or don’t see that such times were hardly, if at all, better than now. Though I can probably easily argue that the early 1900s were much better than now (more traditional Christian values were upheld throughout the world, Darwinism and Big Bang propaganda was not so wide spread or rather did not have as many believers), I can just as easily show it was about as bad as it is right now in 2014. Examples: WW1 and WW2 and other wars besides those, the many cults that existed then most of which still seem to be around and even larger now, the many deceptions being spread and bad policies, like the Prohibition, lies about hemp and marijuana, so it’s not hard to show that the recent past was not much better. I’m sure too that there were many crimes being committed by police from 1900 to 1945, when traditional Christian values were nearing a slow but severe erosion in America and Europe, starting at about 1958 it seems to me. That was a time when Elvis rose to power and the U.S. “military-industrial complex”.

“Don’t ask, ‘Why were the old days better than these?’ For it is not to be wise that you would ask such questions.” – Ecclesiastes 7:10, King Solomon

Breaking Free from Tyranny

How To Obtain Freedom from Corrupt Government During A Time of Broken Government and Unaffordable Or Non-existent Needful Services

It seems obvious: make enough money to buy some reliable transportation, items to keep you comfortable for a long time, and move to some place that is statistically safe with friendly neighbors that will help you out if you help them out. The problem is, unless you are wealthy, you’re not going to be able afford to do that, and not any time soon. And with a predator government about and an increasing likelihood of war, you’re most likely going to have to improvise.

A very rich person can afford to prepare himself for this buy buying a lot of real estate far from the dangerous city and to build himself a big secure house with a large farm, and to hire a medical staff, farm hands, handymen, and well armed security guards with bazookas and anti-aircraft guns. He can store up so much wealth and reliable in-house help that he can sustain himself for decades. He can live like Stony Stark, with little fear of harm so long as he treats his hired help well. But hardly anyone can live that way.

The alternative for the people with average incomes and for the poor, is to agree to live that way, to basically agree to live under a mini monarchy with everyone fulfilling their role peacefully and to the best of their ability and knowing they aren’t going to get paid in money, but rather in protection, food, drink, and goods, like clean and new clothes. Basically it is like a group of people organizing themselves into a business corporation, and if the CEO does too bad a job, they replace him r find a new CEO. A mini government like that it seems to me, much more reliable than a giant beauracy where the “king” can hide behind layers and layers of employees if he wrongs some or neglects them. In the case of a small one like that, the house leader is forced to do a good job or possibly be killed or kicked out by his own security team. And the security team has to watch out for a rebellion from the farm help, handymen and medics if they wrong the house head. It’s a balanced government where everyone agrees they all can’t be king, and need a leader and reasonable comfort and freedom.

The other alternative is somewhat disorganized in which everyone is their own king, and lives a life in which they hope their neighbor or whoever they come across will help them in their chosen safe location has enough skill or goods to help them live comfortably. So a person choosing to live wherever may post an ad, “I’m choosing to live in this new development area here, it’s cheap, the government may break down, I’m a medic, is there anyone good at defense who can come down and live here who will agree to serve as a defense person if the government breaks down, in exchange I will provide medical services.” And eventually you hopefully end up with a community with people of complimentary skills who, in time of a disaster can still live comfortably. They each manage any family they have, each hopefully have guard dogs, and are able to make a nice wall around their community if there is none.

Problems can arise if you end up with someone of very different beliefs than you, someone hostile to what you believe, someone possibly so mentally ill they will cause severe problems among the community. Now a “king” with tight control could easily get rid of that person from his land, but depending on the size of a non-centralized community whose agreed to live together, you may not be able to oust this trouble maker, and he may cause disastrous splits amongst the community.

Now in America, you aren’t allowed in a public corp to discriminate against someone for their religion, and you’re likely to get banned from somewhere like Craigslist if you directly ask, “Any Christians willing to move next to me who are good at…”. So, you have to be stealthy about it. It’s safest to ask members of your own church if you have one, or members of some like-minded group.

It seems to me that the safest states to move to in a time of government break down, in America, is upper California, Washington State, Oregon and Vancouver in Canada and the islands around that area. Something to watch out for is ending up living near communities with opposing beliefs, who may side with roving bands of remnants of the former federal or state government to get rid of you for some reason. So, it will take some good wisdom and physical health to avoid all kinds of trickery and traps that opposing groups may have for you to increase their own comfort and survival odds.

If you can’t afford your own land, and it truly does not seem as if you’re every going to get the money to, I advice becoming as advanced as you can in survival, buying survival tools and rugged camping equipment, finding a partners who are agreeable with you in beliefs with complimentary skills which you may lack or are physically poor at due to some disability, whether sewing or spear throwing or arrow making, and master some spot in the wilderness and to make it yours if no one else has already done so. If you end up in conflict with someone else who claims to “own” the land after a government break down, make sure you know of some other decent spot where you can survive to live at. Getting into conflicts with others that aren’t necessary decreases your chance of survival. Of course the problem is, “Who should back down, if both do than no one will get the land and it will be wasted.” If no one can agree to back down, then you can leave it up to “God” so to speak, or “dice”. You offer to agree to whatever numbers you choose that turn up on cast dice. And if the person disputing with you won’t agree to that, then perhaps it is best that both parties agree to leave the land alone and live away from each other. If you sense the person is so hostile your life is in danger even if you live far from them, it’s best to live even farther out if your odds are survival are about as good. Why risk your life otherwise? The hostile person I suppose will eventually be his own downfall, just as North Korea is always on the verge of disaster due to its bad leadership. It has to rely on more reasonable outside their country to survive.

Why Teabaggers Shouldn’t Have Guns

Today a user named “loic” in response to my detailed logical Biblical rebuke of various gun wielding teabaggers, aka Republicans, I got what is debatebly an ad hominem response, “Damn…did somebody pissed in your corn flakes this morning ?……” and a bunch of pretentious drama dots as you can see.

In response to my response, a narcissist moron teabagger troll-moderator ” jfrey123 / I aim to misbehave…” jumped in to the imaginary rescue and “nuked” me he claimed, in other words, deleted all my responses in true narcissistic style.

His reply was:

Originally Posted by Gullwing View Post
I think you are lost]

He’s talking about the user I nuked above him. They joined just to insult all of us for shooting homeless people.”

Who joined to insult all of us for shooting homeless people? And who is “us”? Your response is a non sequitur, it makes no sense.

“Back to topic:”

Why didn’t you stay on topic in the first place instead of making an insane response? Was your stupid reply anything near useful to the detailed remarks I made? Obviously not stupid guy.

“I agree with Joe, self defense is self defense.”

So, squelch my logical replies because you personally did not like that I rebuke the morons’ insulting babble and a year late, you, the moderator, then give your little opinion as if it were fact, and insult me. Infantile, typical narcissist behavior.

“You’re not defending your own home or dwelling, so it’s not a home defense scenario. But if you have a right to be there”

And super idiot, as I pointed out, the narcissist moron who started the thread DID NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO BE ON THE ABANDONED PROPERTY AND WAS THEREFORE TRESPASSING. FAIL.

“and your fear of being harmed would excite the fears of a reasonable person,”

The point is, infant, he had no reason to be in the abandoned house. As his narcissistic statement clearly shows, he is mentally ill, even his user description points to him being mentally ill: ” Smoggo / Farter”, and clearly then as I said to him, should not own a gun. Smoggo started the thread with:

Are there squatter’s rights in NV?

Ok,This might seem as a “no-brainer” to many of you,but here was the situation: My friend who had to leave his house here in Las Vegas (he left lv and the house) had a realtor check it out and borrow the key to gain access to the house from me. The realtor returned saying the key didn’t work and the locks had been changed on the front door and could see the paintmarks of changing devices.
My friend asked me to investigate the situation,which I did,right after work. I looked over the place and it seemed like there was nobody there,but I could only see the living room from the outside,all bedrooms have solar screens I could not see through at night (8:30 pm). The locks had indeed been changed on the front door and the garage door had been left partially open,although previously locked. I went through the garage and found the interior garage door unlocked.
I opened the door and went in a bit then saw what looked like bedding in the master bedroom that had all previously been removed. I had a poor quality flashlight and a kel tec p-11 with one mag (not a spare) on me at the time,so I retreated because I didn’t know what might be inside the house…a person or multiple people possibly being armed.

All that said (sorry it was soo long),here is the question(s):if I had gone further and encountered someone squatting,would their right be to defend themselves from me seeing as I was the intruder? If they jumped out of nowhere,possibly unarmed,would I be in the wrong if I used lethal defensive force? Remember,the house has no lights nor power.
I do have a ccw,and all my weapons are registered and legal. Thanx for any input

(picture of an ugly dancing fat woman) <—-included cuz it looks like my exwife,just slimmer lol

edit: was it weak of me to leave the place like that?
you have cause to defend yourself.

Clearly the rant of someone who is immature, looking for trouble and praise over his gun and his stupid actions which risked his life and that of others, and possibly children over his arrogance and lack of maturity. The rest of jfrey’s comment is,

“We had a case up here last month: Guy had a house listed for rent, one of the neighbors called him up to say they thought someone was in there. Homeowner went to investigate. …”

Stupido: THE REPLY I MADE POINTED OUT THAT SMOGO IS NOT THE OWNER AND THAT THE OTHER USER, WHO SUGGESTED LYING TO THE POLICE AND MAKING A FALSE EVICTION AND THANKING EVIL GOVERNMENT FOR BEING BIASED TOWARDS THOSE WITH MORE POWER, WAS ALSO STUPID AND WRONG TO GIVE THAT ADVICE, ESPECIALLY BEING THAT IT IS CORRUPT GOVERNMENT THAT CONSERVATIVES ARE ALWAYS COMPLAINING ABOUT. You, an infantile narcissist, jfrey, couldn’t stand my just rebuke of these hypocrites so like a true narcissist erased what you couldn’t bear made you and your clique of morons look stupid and instead made a non sequitur and switched the subject, another logical fallacy called BAIT AND SWITCH. You also threw the baby out with the bathwater even if I had made an ad hominem attack a you seem to imply below. That other user for my readers to know, had said:s perhaps is what you are implying with your enormous copy paste signature below, clearly your lazy way of justifying squelching free speech and hiding the truth.

“Your best bet is to tell metro you’re acting as an agent of the owner and want the trespassers removed. If Metro doesn’t you’ll have to actually file an eviction and start with a 3 day nuisance.

Thankfully Nevada and Clark County are very pro property owner/landlord.”

Again: is bias logical or good, is oppressing the poor good? As I told them, the Bible says, “Those who oppress the poor insult their Maker, but helping the poor honors him.” and anyone who continues to do evil will end up in Hell and that that will be your permanent home.

jfrey’s comment also included this GIANT signature into the end:

“Looking for a Ruger 10/22 rifle or cheap charger pistol for an SBR project. Beat up is fine as long as it functions. PM me if you got one.

10 Commandments of Logical Debate:

1. Thou shall not attack the person’s character, but the argument.” (Ad hominem).

Is that why you hastily made this generalization, “They joined just to insult all of us for shooting homeless people.”? You’re so wrong in the head you hypocritical moron copy paster, the 10 commandments of logical debate come from the Bible:

First you shall acknowledge your Maker and love him with all your heart and no blaspheme him or worship anything else other than him, if you cannot love him with all your heart YOU ARE TO FEAR HIM, because you are an illogical sinner. The Bible is FULL of ad hominem attacks the way you stated it, which was wrong. An ad hominem attack as atheists often quote is referring to AN ARGUMENT THAT AVOIDS THE ARGUMENT WHEN THE ARGUMENT HAS MERIT BY MERELY ATTACKING THE CHARACTER OF THE ONE WHO MADE THE ARGUMENT BY BRINGING UP IRRELEVANT CHARACTER FLAWS. That is why in court it is acceptable and common for a lawyer to ATTACK THE CHARACTER OF A WITNESS has questionable morality. You made an ad hominem attack indirectly by claiming to have nuked me without explanation.

“2. Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack.”

Is that why you said, “They joined just to insult all of us for shooting homeless people.” and deleted my comments so no one could see the evidence for your claim?

Moron who is being pretentious like a typical narcissist, ever heard of “Thou shalt not bear false testimony” and “Do not lie”? Instead you, a narcissist, replace that with your pretentious hypocritical statement. You misrepresented the argument by switching the subject and deleting my comments. (Straw man fallacy). More accurately and less pretentiously stated you idiot, a straw man is simply making up an argument someone didn’t make. You, being a narcissist, think that lengthening your babble and adding “Thou” to it makes you moral and wise, another fallacy.

“3. Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (Hasty generalization)”.

Is that why you hastily said, “They joined just to insult all of us for shooting homeless people.”? Blind hypocrite. And so if I see a group of blacks with black hair and they all tell me that all blacks have black hair, I can’t say, “Well then, all blacks have black hair”? Idiot. What you made was a hasty generalization by stereotyping all “hasty generalizations” as many atheists do. Are you an atheist? Is

“4. Thou shall not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true.” (Begging the question). Like you hastily deciding my comments should be deleted out of your assumption that because you personally disliked them it was right to do so? AND THAT ISN’T BEGGING THE QUESTION YOU MORON. BEGGING THE QUESTION IS MAKING A STATEMENT OR ASKING A QUESTION THAT HAS NO POINT TO IT WITH THE IMPLICATION, OR THE PERSON MAKING THAT STATEMENT OR QUESTION THINKING THEY ARE MAKING A POINT. Example is you quoting these various fallacies and implying that when you delete a comment that your copy paste makes a point as to why, wrong, it does not.

“5. Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, it must be the cause. (Post Hoc/False cause):

And who does this, idiot? So liberals do this so much so that you include this in your copy-paste on logical fallacies? LOL. What a rant, and think about it, this teabagger imbecile leaves this as his signature after every moronic thing he says.

“6. Thou shall not reduce the argument down to two possibilities. (False dichotomy)”. No idiot, you don’t reduce an argument down to two possibilities ARBITRARILY. And why would you say two and not one or three, or four? Is two magically bad? That supposed logical fallacy then is a BEGGING THE QUESTION FALLACY, IT MAKES NO POINT. The fallacy is FALSE DICHOTOMY, not “DICHOTOMIES ARE FALSE”. An example of a true dichotomy is: “If the universe was not a random event creation, then it must have been a deliberate creation”. There is no other is no other logical possibility, there is no third possibility. Your a stupid copy paster who makes hasty decisions.

“7. Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, claim must be true or false. (Ad ignorantum)”

Grammar check. Since your copy paste makes no sense, it is a non sequitur fallacy. What idiot copies something that is supposed to be about logical thinking, AND DOES NOT CAREFULLY READ WHAT HE PASTES BEFORE PASTING IT OVER AND OVER AND OVER, AND STILL DOES NOT READ WHAT HE’S REPEATING ENDLESSLY? A super idiot.

“8. Thou shall not lay the burden of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (Burden of proof reversal)”

Because? No idiot, the way you stated/copy-pasted the fallacy makes no sense. No one makes a claim, “God exists” and then when an atheist says, “Prove it,” replies, “You (atheist) prove he exists.” The fallacy correctly stated is, “Defending a claim as being true if it cannot be disproven.” Not your stupid atheist nonsense of “Hey you prove me right”. No one argues “Prove me right”, they argue, “PROVE ME WRONG”. UGH, HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE!? If you don’t know what you are quoting you infant, DON’T QUOTE IT AS IF YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS!

“9. Thou shall not assume “this” follows “that” when it has no logical connection. (Non sequitur)”

Then why do you also make assumptions and why do you always make non sequiturs? Because: YOU, ARE ILLOGICAL and do not care about truth, logic or evidence, but rather your own feelings, narcissist moron.

“10. Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular, therefore it must be true. (Bandwagon fallacy)”

And who does that so much so that you decided it was oh so necessary to include in your replacement of God’s ten commandments? How many liberals say, “Oh Obama saying change is good is so popular is must be true!?” How many conservatives say, “Oh many people say Bush Jr. was such a nice guy, many say police are nice, so therefore Bush Jr. and police are nice”?

To learn more about logical fallacies click the permanent link on my blog above, to learn more about the insidious mental illness known as narcissistic personality disorder, which I believe many millions of Internet users like the ones I rebuked here have, click the link on my block above referring to it or go to

Will America See An Economic Recovery Anytime Soon

You’re never going to see an economic recovery in America so long as the governors, mayors and the police in America keep harassing citizens, keep jailing them over biased or petty things or one person accusations or hunches and packing the jails and prisons with tens of millions of the potential work force and making home owners pay massive property taxes or harassing them for stupid things like weeds or some vague claim of “overgrowth”. And do you think you’re taxes are being spent wisely when a pan handler is jailed for “pan handling” or holding a sign or some arrested for trespassing on an empty street and all kinds of other petty arrests being made? Is there going to be an economic recovery when citizens keep having to buy expensivish water filters so they can drink water that doesn’t taste like toilet water? The poor will never get out of poverty so long as they are oppressed and having to spend money they need to prosper to instead enjoy the oppressive life they have. The claim that America is not “a third world country” is stupid, because in fact anyone can see that tons of people every day are selling their plasma JUST TO EAT, and are in effect, eating their plasma. What good is all the tech in the world if you can’t afford anything but the cheap stuff? This is a third world country. And about the claim “oh everyone has a flat screen tv”, who cares and who said those TVs were expensive? Do they generate income, if sold would that person suddenly be rich, no, so that’s dumb to use to say American’s aren’t poor. You cannot eat a flat screen tv, it creates a larger electricity bill instead.

There will also be no general economic recovery so long as the government denies people a right to make a profit from their gold mining or panning on BLM property, because there are people who actually obey the various state laws about what you can mine or take out and the BLM does enforce those laws. Think of the stupidity of not allowing some company or person to mine the middle of a massive desert, merely because it’s BLM land, or some environmentalist says there’s a possibly rare lizard there.

So long as there are corrupt people as our leaders and enforcers, there will be no economic recovery, if there is a large recovery, it’s only going to be for some group favored by the corrupt at the expense of the poor and the better part of the country, as in citizenry.

My guess is that there will only be a small recovery if someone comes up with a large ship or fleet of small ships, goes out to a no man’s land in the ocean and implements some sort of underwater mining technology to recover the precious metals or whatever in the ocean floor, or if secret sea-mining is done off the shores.

One more powerful reason I don’t see any significant economic recovery happening soon is because severely mentally ill people are allowed to roam free, and the two or three that matter most are those with the permanent disorders known as psychopathy and narcissistic personality disorder. In other words psychopaths and narcissists. They are devastating to the lives of those they become close to. Their evil behavior may seem light, but if a person is exposed to it long enough it can have a very bad influence and cause a domino effect of misfortunes for the victim. Psychopaths and narcissists are chronically rude and chronic liars. They often become leaders, including business managers or police and cause devastation on an individual level and national depending on what they are doing and how many of them are doing it. A third but lesser problem are schizophrenics being allowed to roam. They are time-sappers. These days many people don’t bother reporting these people because they know that no one is likely to be arrested for simply being a mean person or babbling nonsense, or are so worn out from their bad life or trying to hang on to the good life they have that they don’t bother. There should be a campaign to permanently institutionalize psychopaths and narcissists and to get schizos the help they need and isolate then from the rest of society till they are normal again. Is that going to happen? Even if it did, because corrupt leaders are mostly ruling over us, it would no doubt be done in a poor way, and end up at some point being used to attack or take advantage of the innocent or those making the accusations. Quite simply, the evil governments of the world need to be wiped out for happiness to flourish among the decent people.