The book of truth and life Follow story

antonio Antonio Pinto Renedo

This book represents a constructive criticism to an increasingly decadent world.

Non-fiction All public.

#religion #philosophy
reading time
AA Share


Antonio Pinto Renedo

© Author, layout and cover design:

Antonio Pinto Renedo

Published in October 2011

Revised in 2019



Racial developments

Stockholm syndrome of wars

Hitler enemy of the Germans

End of slavery

Slavery true

The pyramid economy

Slavery today

Immigration policy proper



The homosexuality


Crimes of the church


Art invested

Language reform


My doubts

Ideal educational model

The treatment of animals

Film and sports

Safe driving


The myth of the sun

Optimism and depression

Dental hygiene

The obesity

Drugs and freedom

Birth control

Sexuality future

The abortion


The origin of diseases

Genetic diseases

Pain and infections

Life expectations


The great powers

False democracies

Economic crisis of 2009

Unions and businesses

Fraud law

New UN

Regional issues



Exceptions of justice

Philosophy and concentration

Moral and genetics

Dragon defeated by San Miguel


With this book I intend to stir the consciences of a well to a materialistic vision of life society, through constructive criticism I will try to motivate readers to seek the truth for themselves and reject the prefabricated truths that flood the contemporary world, hoping to encourage the development of a society that truly deserves the adjective evolved.

I have also tried to show my books not only the idyllic vision that could be an ideal future and great achievements that scientific progress can provide us in the future, but also the back of criticism of a society that has a lot to progress but too afraid to confront the truths that have been officially established in each period, mainly by the great powers, more in line with political interest in clarifying the truth.


The voice I had heard from heaven spoke to me again and said, Go and take the open book in the hand of the angel who is standing on the sea and on the land. So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little book. And he said to me, Take and eat it; embitter your body, but in your mouth it will be sweet as honey. Take the book from the hand of the angel and ate it; and it was in my mouth like honey, when they had eaten more than my insides were full of bitterness. I said then: It must prophesy again about many peoples and nations and tongues and kings. (Rev. 10: 8)

This book has been translated from the original Spanish version.


Since the end of World War II the racial issue has become a taboo subject for the whole of humanity, before the conflict was socially accepted that interracial mixtures were wrong behaviors and therefore were not well seen on the set of the moral values of the West, but the brutality of the Nazis proved especially ethnic minorities caused this issue happen to be outlawed and that any attitude positioned against the mixing of the races were once accused of being dangerous and anti-democratic ideology.

It should be borne in mind that freedom of expression is to respect every ideology as long as this is raised peacefully, whether we agree with it or not, but the racial issue happened to be outlawed and since the end of the war almost the study of these issues has been deserted.

One of my intentions in making this book is precisely to break this taboo and talk openly about knowing that even those who have always tried to take advantage of political spurts try to benefit from the criticism of this book.

From my point of view it is a mistake to think that human races are identical in every way and consequently consider that miscegenation is lawful, on the contrary I think it is true that some races are more evolved than others, this does not mean that assume a position of superiority or advantage opposite each other.

It is surprising that in this society that is considered evolved, first considered logical and healthy to try to protect each and every one of racial variants of each animal species, and yet there is a dreadful fear in regards to addressing the safeguarding human race each differentiated way, this is a clear example of true social hypocrisy and socially assumed prejudice.

In my view the mixing of the races that we are trying to impose in this decadent Western society, is one of the greatest atrocities in history, because it involves the extinction voluntarily all the genetic heritage that each racial variant contains.

While it is true that all human races form a single species, it is also true that species is divided into multiple races, and the fact that this issue does not want to be treated does not mean that it does not exist.

It should be borne in mind that it was nature in its great wisdom which found that in every region of the earth there were a different race from the rest, but the current policy for crossbreeding is not only a contempt that inherited genetic heritage for generations but also involves the submission of social and humanistic to the interests of economic nature are those who hide behind the current process of immigration and miscegenation values, social good comes of equality but mongrelized society is an unequal society, in which the foot is given easily to classicisms and exploitation.


The way I see it is true that some races are more evolved than others, but these differences are not so much on an intellectual level, but rather on an aesthetic level, the reason that has given these differences lie in the earth's weather which is the cause of it.

As for racial differences, it is reasonable to think that the level of intelligence in different races present on earth is virtually identical, the reason is that despite the differences between each race all come from the same species and therefore have the same brain size. However, when what is at issue is the aesthetic beauty this is a very different matter, since in some parts of the world aggressiveness climate has led to the outer body image if you look depleted with respect to one the other, for example the fact that the European race is found situated in one of the places on earth with greater climatic balance, results in this race has a most beautiful aesthetic features and therefore more evolved.

A balanced climate is not only good for the development of populations, but also results in a more beautiful race, i.e. giving rise to traits that are characteristic in white, clear skin, smooth or wavy hair and color eye and more graceful hair, if this issue is analyzed without bias is evident that it is a fact, because in the aesthetic appearance beauty is not just in some races than others.

For blacks, the brutality of African climate determined esthetic features characterized by dark skin, lips and nose swollen and black and curly hair look, this adaptation necessary to withstand the aggressive African climate caused however the decline the quality of its exterior aesthetics, to a lesser beauty compared to the European race taking place, i.e. that nature was obliged to give preference to adapting to the territory of aesthetic beauty, this is the reason why the crossbreeding also implies the renunciation of own racial and cultural heritage of the West, is not a coincidence that they were Europeans the first to reach the highest level of technological development, this is logical because Europe is one of the land areas with a climate more balanced and the balance is the source of success in most things, the story is testament to this as the various civilizations that have existed on the planet have always been more advanced when the favored moderate climate.

But the brutality of the Nazis during the Second World War prevented and postponed any discussion on this issue, as the risk of raising the passions of those he came were victims of them, or opportunists as some (NGOs) that promote immigration and could induce confuse impartial analysis of this issue with the condescension with Nazism.


Arguably, there are four races present on earth, and black, brown, yellow white.


This breed is characterized by its seemingly swollen facial features because of their adaptation to the high temperatures of African climate, dark skin and curly hair are designed to protect from aggressive sunlight, to curl your hair the number of layers is increased hair on the head and thus its protection is improved. As to the black character it is usually effusive in his form of expression, a form of response also derived from high temperatures.


This race extends from North Africa to India. Its main feature is to be located between a very warm climate and a more balanced, because of this these regions sometimes have a climate more African type and sometimes the European type, this results in both the racial aspect as the character can not be circumscribed to a specific environment, so you could say that this race is evolutionarily between the black and the white race. As to the character that climate ambiguity leads to a way of being more rude and irascible, especially in the area of North Africa.


Arguably the yellow race is the sister of the white race especially having light skin and straight hair, but this breed was developed in aggressive and very cold Siberian climate, which resulted in some ethnic features characterized by eyes almost covered by the eyelids, which aims to protect them from cold, this is also the most striking feature of this race by giving the eyes an oval look. The characteristic feature in the character of Asians is his nervous personality, which is a response to the need to act quickly before a cold climate that is predominant in northern Asia.


This race represents the balance both physically and psychologically for having developed in the most favorable and balanced climate of the earth. It is in Europe where it combines the best possible temperature and humidity, causing as a result a race that also more balanced and beautiful.

The story is proof of how progress is often accompanied by a favorable climate, this is the reason that at first, after the last glaciation, civilization flourished first in Egypt and Mesopotamia and out in these places where the weather was pleasant, after global temperatures were rising and civilization was gradually moving northward. Egypt and Sumer went to Greece and Rome, later were Spain and France, then England and the United States, progress always smiled nations with a climate more favorable and that always was in line with the increase in global temperature.

Therefore it is evident that the various climates in the soil have a decisive influence on the configuration of the human races, although this adaptation aims protected from extreme temperatures, also it has an adverse effect that is the aesthetic deterioration in its appearance as an inevitable effect of climate adaptation.

Over time, the differences between the different races will be reduced to nothing, because with the progress of science, humans increasingly be less exposed to the influence of the weather, through a simple process of genetic evolution based natural selection, eventually all human beings are equal and that will have been achieved without drama or conflict. This means that once the different races are no longer exposed to different climates present in the soil, gradually and in a spontaneous way, will lose the difference between them, but you have to let nature take its course without forcing it, and until that time comes right thing is that every race occupy their countries and continents without mixing, thus safeguarding their race, their culture and their genetic heritage, thus leading to greater cohesion to their societies.

In the future, during the colonization of the worlds of the solar system, the different adaptation of each race to different types of climates could build it by installing, for example, the black or Arab on planets near the sun, in remote be installed the yellow race and the white race central, this would be useful in the initial process of colonization, but keep in mind that once you got to keep perfect weather on each planet probably racial differences would disappear.


Throughout history, man has been too often influenced by ideological currents that were usually determined largely by the politically correct truths imposed by the great powers to the rest of humanity, long after his military victories. It was not so important to know what the ultimate truth, but to know what the truth was determined by the winner of the last conflict, this kind of ideological trend could be called Stockholm syndrome wars, i.e. the world had to bow the ideological approach of the victor for fear of reprisals, even going beyond almost unconsciously, tend to take for certain these ethical concepts because this way people feel less threatened, you better believe in the truths of the victor not believing and having to defend a different view of a clandestine way, unfortunately the first victim of war is truth loser, i.e. the truths that could defend the other side. The very brutality of war causes after completion is a taboo subject to be elucidated whether this issue or the other could be right on the principles of the losing side, but the impartial man must be able to distinguish things without implying condescension with undignified activities either side.

A clear example of this is the fact that when finished World War II the Americans showed the world its absolute rejection of criminal treatment and extermination policy that the Germans had with the Jews, yet those same Americans had staged a fact similar to the Indian natives a century prior to its almost total destruction, not just no sign of repentance on this fact gave, it was common to justify these acts through media such as film without arousing why any social reaction except isolated cases.

This means that if the Germans had won the war would see films in which these show us how just the "wicked Jews," but as lost, Americans show their films like massacring "Indians evil" that all They are trying to protect their land and their independence from the white invaders.

This demonstrates that seems to have more importance as the historical facts which were truly arise, if it is first presented to the victim who is to slaughter as unworthy and dehumanizes, then public opinion tends to accept more easily the mistreatment of the subject, especially if it is practiced by a great power, this is what happened first with native American Indians and later with German Jews, then these same events have also been surprisingly carried out by Israeli Jews to Palestinians in another example of historical amnesia. If Americans really really repudiate the behavior of the Nazis, should set an example and give back to the Indians at least a small territory so that they can exist as an independent state and repay the historic debt they have with them.


Indeed, the greatest enemy of the Germans during the Second World War was Hitler, since the war was not really an excuse for the Nazis to perpetrate a coup undercover state, which actually wanted was to buy the German government paying for it with their military victories citizens, such was the greed of the Nazis who did not hesitate to sacrifice five million of its citizens in order to get it.

The origin of social discontent in Germany was mainly in the economic crisis of 1929 in the US, but this was a global crisis not only in Germany, however, the Nazis saw an opportunity in this social unrest to organize a coup, using the easy populist language of the alleged offense, common in the nationalist parties.

There had always been a reluctance to West Germany since the Roman Empire under Emperor Octavian tried to invade its territory ending this attempt at failure, this reluctance joined the unrest caused by the economic crisis, which gave the Nazis an ideal occasion to try to seize power and create a dictatorship.

But they could not eliminate democracy in a cold way, since it would have caused a great social response, thus they managed to achieve absolute power creating a situation of social alarm by causing the onset of World War II. In an emergency situation it was easier to handle power claiming control of that absolute power was a situation of necessity and not something intentional.

But the development of the military campaign was expensive, so the Nazis devised as a solution for economic resources blame the minority social group the Jews of being complicit in the economic crisis, so on the one hand, they removed the medium to a collective bit friend of the Nazis and on the other, creating a source of funding for the army seized with this social group.

It is clear that the Nazis wanted to justify the dictatorship and the change of power through military conquests, but his total lack of judgment shown by example in its extreme cruelty to prisoners including children and their policy of exterminating anyone who does not carry them stream.

An example that the Nazis were all enemies even German citizens is in the battle of Stalingrad, because Hitler refused to allow the return of his army, some (200.000 mens) after losing the battle, because the most dangerous for the absolute power of the Nazis was a well prepared for the fight army, but had realized how unwise it were their leaders, therefore the Nazis did not hesitate to leave their fate to his men and refused even the possibility that escape the Soviet encirclement heading south, having returned to Germany there were many opportunities they had removed the despotic government.

Another example of the worst enemy of the Germans were Nazis demonstrated in the fact that at the end of the war Hitler did not hesitate to enlist children in their ranks in order to protect him while he was ensconced in his bunker and knowing that the war was absolutely lost, could have tried some kind of truce, but did not care that German cities were destroyed and millions of its citizens dead, it is clear that for the Nazis and especially to Hitler human life including their own citizens had no value and only had the desire for power.

Clearly the Nazis only was the desire for power without limits, but with an absolute lack of judgment and ability to restraint, as if they had been terminated the war to reach the Russian border would have had many chances to sign the peace with the allies in an advantageous situation, which would have allowed them to gain time and consolidate their positions in control of Europe, we must bear in mind that although the allies had wanted to continue the war, Russia was not yet at war with Germany and he would he able to support oil and provisions, though the Nazis were some unable despotic individuals to understand the meaning of the word restraint and invasion of Russia demonstrated their eagerness to unlimited power but also his profound lack of judgment, it would not be just blame the Nazis previous military victories, but the high technological and industrial Germany.

But Hitler was not the only political leader who throughout history showed little appreciation for the lives of their own men, since before Napoleon and Alexander the Great showed that after a useless war was always another, as if they never end, An example of this was the purge Alexander made his men when he told them his desire to conquer India and they protested demanding the return to Macedonia, this season especially, more like a sightseeing trip than anything else, but at the cost the shedding of the blood of his own men.

However it says that everything that characterized the Nazis was necessarily wrong would be not telling the truth, because there is no person or political group that all its principles or ideological principles are absolutely true or absolutely false to think so because it is very unwise.

The way I see the attitude of the Nazis towards defending a racial integrity was not necessarily wrong, because the race as I explained before, part of our own cultural heritage and is an element that determines a culture and a civilization, but that does not necessarily justify the desire to enslave or subjugate other races.

So it is correct and respectable considering, for those who want to believe that the white race is more evolved than others and need to defend it as a proper element of cultural heritage, but always from a peaceful attitude.

For the Nazis defending the racial integrity was more an excuse to try to seize the property of the Jews an ideological point of view, but because of his despotism condemned anyone who defended the rejection of miscegenation in a peaceful way to secret hiding before the war was a sign of good education in the West the rejection of racial miscegenation, but after she many people still remain opposed knew they could not express their opinions openly because then the opportunists confuse with the Nazis and we attended a post-war society deeply marked by these issues and where prejudice against those who refused were precisely miscegenation and not vice versa as it is usually thought.

The most striking postwar society is that those who proclaim the fight against racial discrimination and support immigration are seeking the same exploit them. It should be borne in mind that although these immigrants come for help by showing an image of weakness, yet have their own traditions and expectations in many earliest cases that Western and eventually could emerge interracial conflict and be costly to those who naively defend the open door policy.

What is clear is that a society is stronger the more cohesive is in all respects be they racial or ideological, fold the god of mere economic profit is not a long term solution.

Humanism that emerged after the Second World War for coexistence between races was a positive humanism, but yet that does not have to be in contradiction to the defense of values such as race or culture.

You shall not sow your vineyard two kinds of seed; because all would be unclean, sowing seed which the product of the vineyard. (Deuteronomy 22:9)

Just as a farmer does not sow seeds of different species in the same field, it is not logical that man mix races and cultures in the same country.


There are people who when they do not want to be elucidated about the reason for an issue, they just find a way to discredit it, that's how the word came xenophobia, i.e. instead of giving a logical reason to reject the thesis simply is qualified disease and thus is no longer necessary to demonstrate his mistake, but it makes no sense to reduce everything to a simple concept, since things like racism, feminism or sexism, may have contained many concepts and some may be correct and whereas others do not, so it is simplistic to reduce them to a single issue.


Contrary to what one might think, the end of slavery will come precisely from the rejection of racial miscegenation, because those who only think about exploiting their fellow men avail themselves of immigration to get their unworthy purposes and with the approval of the economic and political powers.

If developed countries worry of poor countries would not be limited to creating ephemeral policies aimed at sending modest items of food to those countries, since sending food to an overpopulated country only leads to a greater increase in population and thus demonstrated the bad faith of friends who call themselves poor.

The only way to eradicate poverty in these countries is the implementation of a strict policy of birth control to limit the number of children to two per couple and this coupled with a technological development programs and cease this current coveted immigrants desperate for a job, and workers in developed countries would be improved their employment situation.

In this way each race would have its recognized territory internationally, immigrants who were in territories of other races would have to return to their racial areas and countries of colonization and the United States should create states within their borders to their ethnic minorities, and by example, blacks were could deliver south Florida half the native Indian tribes could give them territories inside to create their own independent state, and the white settlers would pay off the historic debt that takes two hundred years pending to be solved and the same with the other races, these races should receive land based on their percentage of the total population, they all have the same right to benefit from the lands of their country.

would no longer need that blacks have to live subjugated by a predominantly white society that systematically tries to pretend that the issue of race does not exist, they could well have a state in which both the president and the police or deputies would of their own race and that would be the real test of freedom.

In the case of the Indian tribes, many white presume to respect them or worry about them, but few propose delivered to them lands with which to create their own independent state in the United States. The extermination of the Indians has nothing to envy that was committed to the Jews by the Nazis and is a score that is still unsolved, the colonization of the United States had not been so disastrous for the Indians if just white settlers they had recognized their land rights. But the white man's greed knew no bounds, for it would be a positive gesture and an act of reconciliation with history, these tribes the right to be recognized to have an independent state.

However it would not be good for the world the demise of the United States, because despite their mistakes has brought many good things to the world, but it would be appropriate for this country to become a strong nation, but could be smaller, to wean their racial minorities and no longer imperialist zeal that characterized much of its modern history thus be incorporated into white society of nations that have their own international governing body and so would the other races.

Then there would be a headquarters of the United Nations rotate among all races and continents, but already devoid of selfish right of veto which was introduced after the Second World War to give advantage to the victors of the same, here the laws would be elected by majority impartially.


The model of contemporary society that is based on a steady stream of immigrants many of them illegal, is the result of a developed world folded completely to a purely economic vision of society, without taking any account of social values and coexistence.

This contemporary society claims to be an example to the history of prejudice and lack of it is that most have of all time.

The current policy gives priority to pretend on being, for this hypocritical society does not care about being prejudiced only matter appear not to have them, this is a time that placed first who should be the last and is said to be last who should be the first, time will tell how soon drop this social system based on lies.

The main reason for this situation is in the implementation of false democratic models that pursue power for a few away from its true purpose.

Actually policy pro miscegenation currently governed not seek help migrants since migration flows are made so that these immigrants occupy the worst jobs and underpaid, this is therefore a slaver policy covert and yet surprisingly driven by left-wing parties.

It is striking that in the US were left parties who opposed the eradication of slavery, when it would make sense otherwise, this shows how wrong he is supporting one party or another in an absolute way.

It must take into account also the immigrants who come to the developed countries in many cases the most prepared countries of those who leave, and leave those countries to condemn the loss of that skilled workforce.

It is also a prejudice assert that immigrants do not take jobs away from citizens of the countries to which they go, because if an immigrant accept a lower salary to a local is clear that the work will give it to him, but a local could not live on that salary, because usually much of what they earn immigrants keep it to bring their countries of origin where that money is more valuable, but it is clear that in this way cause harm to workers from countries that it will no longer have that advantage.

It is also hypocritical to say that without immigrants those jobs disappear, the example is that if immigrants are to march evidently construction would continue building buildings, but the builders would have to pay more to their workers. Of course the law of supply and demand will determine that some trades disappear that has always existed, but it is not logical to bring immigrants trying to survive by miserable wages.

It is therefore this Western society a society that applies an economic policy based approach covert slavery completely ignoring questions of social order and coexistence making this modern world in a real tower of babel in which miscegenation pro the economic profit of a few is the norm.

It is true that those states that enter the use of a slave economy or pro miscegenation initially see grow its economy by the effect of low wages of immigrants, but in a second phase that mysticism provokes a social disunity that medium or long term ends up hurting the economies and resulting clearly worse than an economic model developed from its own citizens or foreigners who share their cultural or racial values. Not forget that in the history of the evolution of nations always match the phase of growth and expansion periods when stocks were more homogeneous and therefore united, and precisely stagnation and reversal of these companies used to come after an important part of its economy pass to be based on slavery, this is what happened to Rome and now is happening to the West and the United States.

Another sign of slave economy is to deny all people the right to a free and guaranteed health care for which no one could be unassisted as in the United States, if you really want to be an example of progress in the world should prove starting with their own citizens.


A clear example of what would be a slave economy is the pyramidal economy, this economy has been practiced in the West of a fairly continuous basis, especially in the United States, this type of economic approach is to maintain a steady flow of immigrants which is oriented towards the worst trades and given quite far from what would be desirable treatment, then they are told that already live better when they win money with their low wages and their savings up businesses or businesses with which then they can also exploit new flows of immigrants who come after.

The downside to this type of economy is that it creates a rift between the whole of society causing a feeling of insecurity to hinder social cohesion to consider only economic factors, is not that immigration has to be necessarily bad, but it is necessary that this be done in matching patterns in cultural and racial factors so that is greater social integration and more difficult to create ghettoes and abuse towards such groups.


Arguably today slavery has gone from being an open and visible issue as in the past to become a discrete phenomenon by another name because in the present that traffic is called illegal immigration.

Certainly there are some organizations dedicated to profiting by such immigration, but it is pathetic to see that they are Western governments the real instigators of these mafias of human trafficking, as the best gift that you can do is give priority to immigrants entering in the West against the law, that those who try to enter legally.

It is not logical to say on one hand that is against the mafias of immigration and on the other hand legalize mass immigrants that these organizations bring, since this policy does is justify these mafias trafficking modern slaves and thus make grow and always have many candidates use them to enter illegally in the West.

It is necessary for the West to change its economic policy and stop considering economic profit as the only aspect to consider and try to encourage instead a more just and equal society, but that is not possible with an economic model slaver and pyramidal based on miscegenation as a form of exploitation.

Promote a homogeneous society in ethnic and cultural aspects in each race and continent also it serves to end the injustices and exploitation of some human beings to others.

The best way to end the pattern of slave society and pro miscegenation would be to reject the racial miscegenation and promote the development of backward in their environment with technology training programs economies and a stimulus to birth control, for which only the population of these countries would increase the extent to which its citizens can be fed and stocked with all your basic needs without having to depend on others.


The best way to organize migration processes is that both the sending country of migrants and receiver share a same social values i.e. having the same race the same culture and a same or similar cultural values, the reason is very simple and is if already difficult to get a good living even among neighbors, much harder to be a coexistence with people of other races or cultures, especially if these cultures are much less developed.

Moreover, the mixture of races and cultures, can lead to a clear loss of values, because each race was made by nature to live in climates and different continents, racial interbreeding can lead to chaos in the West to remember the ancient history of the tower of Babel.

It is a serious mistake that Western society is folded to purely economic interests by allowing the arrival of uncontrolled form of immigrants, because eventually the unstable equilibrium may break, leading to tragic incidents that have already begun to happen in some countries, but could get much worse. It would require the commonsense return to the West on these issues as existed before the Second World War, but then was silenced by the fear that any activity contrary to miscegenation and for the defense of European values opinion remained pigeonholed as Nazi nature. It would therefore be necessary to redirect this issue that only companies and speculators benefit, but loses European society and culture.

I would also like to stress that all acts of violence against immigrants by the mere fact of being, must have the rejection of the whole society and indeed are such acts which cause people confuse these vandals with those opposed to miscegenation in a peaceful way, because this is not a problem of some races against each other, it is an ideological problem of those who believe in interbreeding and those who do not believe in it.

It is also important to note that an advanced society that neglects the immigration process at its borders, it risks repeating the disaster suffered by the Romans when at the end of his empire, wanting to help some oppressed tribes but backward, let them cross the these border and then took up arms against the state causing serious damage, this could happen in the West if that purely speculative policy of patronizing illegal immigration continues.


The only way to get that European society and culture are maintained stably would be that its borders have a clear demarcation, in which the toils of expansionist type some not shall prejudice the idea of creating a cohesive society based on a common values and culture, it would be wise not to accept within the European community states that do not they shared these values is to say that it would be more correct than the territories included in this community of states were not the south beyond Gibraltar, Crete or the Bosporus Strait and the east end at the border with Russia, this in turn could create another community of such states with former Soviet countries, otherwise the risk of losing the values of it runs European culture.



In the early twentieth century feminism it emerged as a force which was originally supposed towards the liberation of women from a supposed historical affront caused by men, but soon ended up becoming one of the greatest scourges for Western society.

The main ideological feminism argument is the assertion that men and women are equal and therefore the tasks and functions performed in life also have to be equal.

Obviously this is already an awful lot from its very root, since precisely the nature made to the two different sexes precisely with the intention that their duties also were, i.e. both sexes what actually represent are different specializations, so that acting in a manner associated multiply the benefits for both.

What is reasonable is the claim that men and women must have recognized the same right to develop as individuals to be happy and feel free.

Another false statement of feminism is that in ancient times women were engaged in household chores because they were slaves of men, are easily forgotten that in those days life expectancies were shorter than now couples used to have numerous children throughout their reproductive life, therefore the dedication of women in the home was not something imposed, but an inevitable necessity and is a frivolity criticizing the man of those times I had as difficult as women's life.

It is reasonable to think that women must have recognized the same right as men to be happy, but that does not mean that to achieve this are bound to pursue the same functions as their nature in its great intelligence decided to divide human beings into two sexes and each of them specialize in different tasks and it gave each a different biological sex shape and also different personality, this does not mean that one sex is inferior to the other, but rather have different functions.

Another problem caused by feminism is the control command, i.e. all organized social group needs to have an order of clear command to determine a person to exercise these functions before deciding which sex is more qualified to do my conclusion is that function is preferable that the exercise men as a rule, since the male is the freest has been to engage in important functions and exclusive dedication, not having to go through the task of pregnancy and parenting children, so it is the man who should be the president in marriage, in any dictator case, since they are two very different things, so the man must make decisions in a democratic manner, taking into account the views of all family members, without trying to impose their wishes on others.

That is the man in the couple must have recognized his status as leader of the family of an administrative but democratically, i.e. to be the case that a man was unfair to his wife or children, logically wife would have the right to blame her or separated from if necessary.

Nature decided to specialize sex to improve humanity to devote each to different tasks and order of command is another benefit of this specialization, because just as in magnetism like poles repel each other the same way man is not possible coexistence between men and women without making clear the existence of different tasks and a clear leader.

Another example is the dispute that occurs over whether after pronouncing the word "children" should be pronounced "and girls" being together, but the problem does not end there, because then it would have to determine which of the two would have to be pronounce first.

The myth of feminism poses a completely unrealistic view of the show as a bad and always be lucky, when the hardness of life has always been the same for both sexes, albeit differently man.

An example is the fact that life expectancy in men are usually lower than those of women, which debunks the claim that his life has been better than theirs.

Another criticism of feminism is that women work all day, but keep in mind that women engaged in household chores, have a more diffuse and less controlled work, choosing breaks at will unlike men who are more controlled and more rigid schedules, plus they have the benefit of being in the comfort of home.

Ideally, women who wanted to work outside the home had part-time jobs at least until the children were minors, so they could combine home life with work and so your life more rewarding, well this would provide them some independence from men, the feminist myth induce women to compete with men in the working world which has led to is that many women after a workday of eight hours have to go home and deal housework, which has led them to worsen their situation. If both spouses spend all day working away from home, of course they will not have time to look after their children and home.

This would be solved if the taboo of feminism ended and accepted generally that have different roles in life is not something that makes women inferior but merely different, so it is better that those jobs that require total dedication to be occupied preferentially by men, having more time available.

Another victim of feminism have been children, since by raising goal of women performing lives of men and men's work, women who have believed were doomed to forget the important task of having children and raising them, saying frivolously who already have children of immigrants, they have thus condemned to Western society to its own process of extermination and the gradual undermining of their race and culture in favor of immigration in a process of gradual aging of society.

The logic is that every society and every culture have normally their own descendants who are heirs of their own culture. Say that we will solve the problem of immigrants is a way of not wanting to face the serious problem that feminism created in the aspect of birth is not only a right but a duty that every government to ensure that the generational change it occurs and if that does not happen is because there are important things to change.

Another victim of feminism are the elderly, because women who attempt to combine intensive work with having children, just pretending too often they are the grandparents who are engaged in their upbringing, turning them and other victims hidden in this movement.

If men and women are engaged in the same things in life, the differentiation of the sexes will be useful to be competing with each other in the same plane, in couples can not be peace and children will find themselves disadvantaged and that if come to birth, both sexes need to make peace and understand its raison d'etre.

In the background feminism which has led humanity is a futile confrontation between men and women not understanding that nature made them for different but complementary roles do not understand that it is the woman who becomes pregnant and is the woman who has to breastfeed their children, because nature decided to go one sex and not the two who assume these functions. In addition another obvious difference is the already known corpulence and other less known is the quick reflexes, which is higher in men. Another topic that is said, is that women are better drivers than men, this is because they have fewer accidents, but not for the better drive, but because they are less reckless as this is a man's own quality. Thus there are clearly differences both physical and psychic between the sexes that make each equally important, but suitable for different tasks.

There is also debate about whether women are paid less than men in their jobs, in this issue, the key is to determine whether they are charging less performing the same functions or not, since what counts in the end is productivity and therefore you can not speak of discrimination if productivity is different or is it different functions. But if it is the same function and the same productivity logically you should charge the same.

Another feminist myth is the claim that married women must have a differentiated salary of the husband, but such a claim would establish that marriage does not exist, it would consider women as contracted and therefore outside the family, in a marriage is given by granted that there is a society for men and women created, where all assets of the couple must be considered as property of both equally and therefore makes no sense to speak of a differentiated salary. But when a woman has a job outside the home there is nothing wrong with having your own bank account in order to improve their sense of security, provided that income involved in maintaining family like man.

On the subject of separation legislators should try to avoid discrimination against men as usual today and both the goods of marriage and the care of children should be shared equally between each spouse, unless some circumstance force majeure restrain her. Laws that are biased to what they wear is to encourage separation rather than help it, to give advantage to one sex over the other, and in the end both spouses and the children end up seeing impaired.

Perhaps in the background, some of those women who created feminism for men as men feel, and all the women's apparatus was just an alibi to hide this fact.

Therefore it is not here to deny women rights such as suffrage, to work wherever they want or even occupy a management position at a given moment, in this as in many other issues may be exceptions, more well what it is to understand that men and women represent a particular specialization by nature for our good and performing various tasks in life is not a subject but an advantage for everyone. With specialization humans doubles its effectiveness while avoiding the shock created by placing both sexes in the same functions.

However, in the common future it will be that couples have in most cases two children on average, and therefore, although women devote most of his time to raise them still remain them enough to do a job half-day. But it is clear that in this case would not be wise to take care of work much responsibility or dedicated, to have him to reconcile with housework and childcare. This does not mean that men can not participate in the care of children, but it is logical to be in a secondary and indirect plane.

Therefore, it is right that women consider motherhood as their primary occupation rather than compete in the professional field with men, at least while their children are small.

In any case neither is it here to state that everything in it feminism is bad, one example is the struggle these women have against male abusers who use their wives as the scapegoat for their own traumas in act of vanity and crime, but it is important to separate this from the belief that both sexes have to perform identical functions in life.

Another success in the feminist struggle was to defend the right to secede, keep in mind that the most beautiful thing in a relationship is that there is a match character between spouses, but otherwise it is best to dissolve the relationship because in the world there are lots of ways of being and sometimes the period of courtship is not enough to know a complete form.

If society would stop trying to reduce everything to simplistic phrases such as racism, sexism or feminism, he would realize that by analyzing these issues impartially find that what they considered a simple matter, actually contains a multitude of concepts and ideas within and not all of them have to be good or bad, because everything has to be analyzed individually and objectively without generalizing.


An example of the social confusion that exists in these times is the way society treats the issue of homosexuality, because in this question can not distinguish the difference between freedom and licentiousness, i.e. the "democratizing" currents walking west from the late nineteenth century, make the public more receptive to the different inclinations that citizens in the use of their individual freedom to choose. However it should not be confused that there is a difference between respecting the attitudes or opinions of others and do acts of condescension or complicity with them, because one thing is that that respects others do in their free will with your body or your life and quite another to do what is right, why many people knowing not distinguish these two issues have respect for the wrong behavior condescension considering it is the same.

As a result, the social stream for which it has gone from an absolute rejection of these behaviors almost total condescension, being a must today be homosexual or at least justify all claims has emerged. An example of this is the issue of adoptions, homosexual intended to be considered as normal couples and then choose adoption, but it is necessary to note, that when giving a child to a partner state has the duty to ensure that this couple is as close as possible to parents that the child has lost, so that it can be the contribution of both sexes in their education and therefore be the best. It is not the same as gays, lesbians and transsexuals considered good for them than it really is good for children, as the best form of family that can give them, always be the most similar to nature to them I can offer, i.e. some parents of both sexes as the couple who brought them into this world.

The right thing would be for the state and the citizens respect to these social groups, but not condescend to their behavior, as to pretend to consider them as marriage, because if each person had to tell the state what their sex and state what would for good, in that case also others would say that they are animals or another planet and the state being consistent with what he does with transsexuals would have to prove them right, but that would not be the rule of law and reason but the rule of individual whim and state yielding to him.

Homosexuality is therefore a deviation of sexual orientation and it would be desirable that the state would help these people regain their proper orientation instead of doing otherwise, this could be achieved by medical treatment, for example by giving male hormones necessary or by psychological means.


This is a deviation of sexual orientation favored by a genetic flaw that causes in man a deficiency in the number of elements that determine their sexual orientation, such as deficiency of male hormones, in this case it would be good that the state would help to these people find what they lack to perform as men, instead of having an attitude of mere condescension.


When a child goes through a difficult childhood and has a scary character, which can also be genetic, it can lead to behavior of a homosexual nature, the cause is because these people may consider that they find it better to have as a partner a man who Give them a greater sense of protection that a woman therefore what these people are looking to increase their sense of security.


Some people being all the normal effects from a genetic point of view, it opts for homosexual behavior, the reason must be sought in its infancy. Normally in this period of life the children have not yet developed their sexual urges and tend to see sex as something strange or alien the same way that sports two teams are formed, there are children who mistakenly believe that women are from an opposing team or foe, usually during puberty children are realizing that the opposite sex is not the enemy, but rather complementary and forget these suspicions. However there are children who then have acquired prejudices towards the opposite sex that leads them to reject heterosexual relationships, this is an example of obstinacy and stubbornness but led to an extreme degree.


Actually no such thing, actually those people who consider themselves bisexual have normal sexual instincts, the problem is in character, since they are such people that everything they see they have to do, therefore have a unstable and impulsive personality that leads them to do things by imitation without sufficiently reflect also in a society like today in which these issues are too present in the media is normal that place be given to such situations.


In the background the way homosexuals keep their sex arguably more a form of masturbation that genuine sexual relationship, and that deep sexual mechanism is very simple and easy to stimulate. What the gay or lesbian is to trick these mechanisms are intended to be stimulated, but not as they do, which is nothing more than a deviation from its true purpose.

The real problem lies behind homosexuality is that for one reason or another these people do not feel well with the sex they were born, however they should be the first to find items that are missing to fully carried out in sex rather than contradict, it is true that their situation may be regrettable, but deviant behavior is what makes distance them even more true happiness that comes with a life in harmony with nature. Nor is it true that there are men born with sex man but brained woman, so there are men and women who have their male or female little chiseled features, but that's not a reason to reject their sex, but to try to find what they lack. Deep down perhaps ideally, those men who do not feel very masculine join those women who do not feel very feminine and perhaps could gain from each other so that they lack.

In my opinion, you can expect very little of a society that considers acceptable or normal so aberrant and unnatural as homosexuality practice, because if this society is unable to distinguish the difference between respect and condescending is that it lacks judgment on ethical issues.

It should be borne in mind that evil is not only expressed through weapons, because there are other forms of evil as that which concerns us, it is more difficult to distinguish, or for example those television programs that encourage ego and vanity among children, may not see or firing weapons, but incitement to evil is manifest and worse than that of those who say programs away.

Therefore it is right that both society and the state to respect these or other individual inclinations, but without pandering to them, because one thing is to respect their right to choose and quite another is to consider what they do this well.

I would also like to stress that although a genetic defect or personality to promote homosexuality but in no case provokes, because it only depends on the free will of the people.



And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me saying, Come hither; I will show you the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters; who committed adultery with the kings of the earth, getting drunk the inhabitants of the earth with the wine of her prostitution took me to a desert in spirit; and saw a woman sitting on a purple beast full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet and covered with gold and precious stones and pearls and had in her hand (one hand) a golden cup full of abominations and (secondly) the filthiness of her fornication. Written on her forehead was a name, a mystery: Babylon the great, the mother of fornicators and abominations of the earth. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses of Jesus women; and I was surprised at her with great astonishment. (Rev 17)


The church was founded by its founders honorable purposes, but evil and greed present in the world soon undertook the task to master it and make it an instrument of evil.

But it is a serious mistake to think that where is supposed to be God is really, for that is the best claim for those wanting to make a bad appear to do good, so the church soon came to serve evil and not the good for which supposedly it founded and became an instrument of the powerful of the earth to achieve their illicit purposes.

This is how the alliance between the Catholic Church and the emerging Spanish empire in the sixteenth century emerged, Spain got the ecclesiastical blessing for military conquest and subjugation by the violence of indigenous tribes and in return the church got the right to impose their religion and dominance throughout the empire.

Therefore it expected to arise movements in Europe that claimed the church return to its humanitarian origins and not the mere empowerment.

This is how Protestantism emerged and this marked the beginning of the end of an area under a totalitarian church that had an atrocious to freedom of expression and progress of social freedoms fear middle Ages.

When the Roman Empire was near its end and its economy showed signs of weakness, Emperor Constantine considered it appropriate to name Christianity the official religion of the empire and thus achieve cohesion was missing, using religion as a means to get it, but once the empire was dismembered church became more of a means of political power in a religious instrument.

The decision of the Roman emperors to install their capital in the east was a big mistake by being more a throwback to the past that a commitment to the future as more and more progress was favoring the territories of Europe and less to those of East or Africa. Surely if the capital of the empire had been transferred to Central Europe possibly the Roman state had continued to exist until today, the emperors were unable to distinguish between the importance they had East and Africa in the past, and progress was to come in Europe in the future, and they squandered the state capital betting on territories in decline, as when they were determined to build a city in the desert in north Africa.

During the Middle Ages the church was dedicated to a terrible persecution of healers, who naturally engaged in curing diseases through the knowledge of the therapeutic properties of plants, which had been passed from father to son for generations , therefore far from helping humanity, the church did was increase the suffering of people simply because a fit of jealousy and desire for prominence, so the only medicine that remained was based on chemical knowledge in those days they were just beginning, unjustly depriving humanity of natural remedies that were much more advanced.

So many innocent people were accused of witchcraft and their property and lands were taken over by the church, this example was followed centuries later by the Nazis.

During the Middle Ages the church also tried by all means prevent the spread of the biblical writings to the general public through the press, and tried to monopolize the dissemination of its content only in their own precincts.

Nor did they hesitate to kill those trying to promote the development of science or those who tried to prove that the earth revolved around the sun, for the church's freedom of expression had no place in her womb, such was his sense of power.

Another stain on the history of the Catholic Church was his fight against religious freedom to form the organization called "Holy Inquisition" designed to imprison or kill all those who having been denied the right to profess one's religion would find doing them.

Therefore, the attitude of the church during the Middle Ages left a lot to be desired compared to the vitality and joy of living that were characteristic of Greece and Rome, obsessed with giving a negative and catastrophic vision of life in the belief that and maintain greater control over people.

Another choice that the church should never do is constituted as an independent state, for religion should always be in the field of culture and never political, and after the emergence of the first European democracies the church was more outdated than ever be the first dictatorship to appear and possibly be the last to die. This is why it is a contradiction that some states are considered independent, but still allocate part of their budgets to a private, parallel organization such as the church.

Also in the domestic level, the almost obsessive determination to wield all the power led her to deny its members the right to marry, being this very counterproductive measure to further separate the priests of society and also favor discrimination in favor of homosexuals within the church and those who wished to marry could not continue in it. It should be borne in mind that there is nothing to suggest that church members can not marry, and this was a unilateral initiative of religious leaders in the Bible.

The desire of the church of trying to forgive in God's name also constituted an abuse of its powers, more directed this act to obtaining confidential information to make an act of justice, it was impossible to know whether such repentance was sincere or not. That power that they are attributed due to the fact that Jesus told the apostles that after he was no longer in them would fall the task of representing, but in any case it must be interpreted to mean that Jesus would give the blessing all that they or their successors did.

By denying the church to its members the right to marry, also favored the excessive growth of homosexuality among them, and also having these issues vetted inside, this resulted in scandals of child abuse than a massive scale occurred. But the church away from pursuing these acts, what he did was move these abusers where none were known thus giving rise to new abuses, he also obstructed justice in order that these facts do not know.

Another sign of alienation from the church to the Bible was the deification of the religious personages, this deification led to the return of society to a phase of history and finished that is polytheism, i.e. had replaced the ancient gods for virgins and saints, which was in clear opposition to the biblical doctrine that said that only God is to be worshiped and that all men should be fair.

In addition, the church has maintained a practice of condescension with self-torture practiced during processions and other religious celebrations, which leaves it to the same height as the primitive tribes who believed that sacrificing people to their gods was lawful, these people They understand that the only true sacrifice is the one that occurs when there is no choice but self-torture and bloodshed without befits wild and the church has done nothing to stop these practices.

But the biggest and most serious crime that the church made was to use religion as an instrument for obtaining power and wealth and not to propagate the ideas of Christ or other honorable ideas, because of this future generations were acquiring the idea that the excesses of the church were responsible for Christ, prompting an anti-Christian power to confuse the difference between his teachings and despotic behavior of those who claimed to represent, but that's where you have to act the intelligence of people and realize that no is the same seems to be and is not the same to say that it is representative of Christ to be. Man can only achieve true freedom if it ceases to confuse appearance with reality and through critical thinking seeks truth valuing things by facts and not by appearances, is through that critical thinking as can be found a future society whose foundations are the search for truth and objective analysis of the facts.

Another unfortunate fact in the church is to give a negative image of sexuality, because of this many men and women were forced into a life of seclusion and separation from the rest of society and to promote a negative view of sexuality, or motherhood for women, as if being a virgin get close to a woman to God but have children no, the church is responsible for this because he never bothered to break this myth, it is only permissible to defend virginity in the pre-marriage as a form of responsible attitude, but it does not make sense as the ultimate goal.

The source of this confusion was because the apostles in order that the ideas of Jesus had echo and diffusion in society and prevent his legacy was lost, added some things to the true facts of his life such as theme of his conception of miracles or the star of Bethlehem, but the church once achieved its goal of spreading the message of Christ to the world had a duty to end this myth of him, because it helped to extend the true that is what the message of Jesus meant, perhaps Jesus was more like the rest of men in the physical aspect of what the church wants us to believe and perhaps not do the miracles that we have, but nonetheless if what it is to find miraculous events in the life of Jesus, no doubt there was one and it is their will and their success in the attempt to extend his philosophy for the good and coexistence among people, so ta not of what later became his legacy would also be unfair to hold you liable him.

Thus the idea of the divinity of Christ should be sought more in the value of its message in purely physical facts, because all truth is itself divine nature and the message of Jesus was true was also then divine, But something else was the set of material facts attributed to him, which could be far from reality.

The truth is that the early history of Christianity was a little sad, since Jesus had to sacrifice his life so that his ideas were extended and the apostles had to sacrifice the truth to achieve the same objective, we must take into account that in those times people were much more likely to be swayed by rituals and supposed miracles and less simply hear the message of Christ.

Another crime of the church was to pretend to deny any criticism of the pope, saying he was infallible and therefore could not go wrong. This statement besides being pathetic, represents one of the biggest attacks on freedom of expression that has occurred in history, asserting that all its deliberations from God and therefore are certain involves an extremely pretentious and clearly malicious action.

But what is truly amazing is that after all the facts described and that have occurred throughout history, the church still intends to give lessons in morality to the rest of society, as having sole ownership of truth and the rest people just have to shut up and accept its deliberations, such a thing is an insult to the intelligence and it is a duty of all not accept such powers.

Between God and men do not have to be necessarily intermediaries and if any does have to be organizations like the church has shown that their goals are different and not the good of humanity, because the truth is not owned by anyone alone god, and every man has the right and duty to seek itself without necessarily having to rely on intermediaries.

In this world of contradictions in which truth is presented as false and false is presented as true, the church uses as a means of propaganda and to control the population of a false victimhood by which we are presented as eternal offended and supposedly beneficial, when he has never made a genuine examination of conscience or tried to advance or to pursue the iniquities committed in its midst.

It is also a profoundly petty and hypocritical act, think that because they support the church are to get the favors of God, for who so acts he wants to do evil and no good. God does not like appearances and false rituals but the facts, and a church that has moved away from the purposes of Jesus does not deserve to be precisely provide support.

Nor do I say that everything that made the church during the out negative times since contributed to the spread of the Bible and this is one book that has contributed to the development of man in the moral level, however for church religion it was more an instrument for power than a means to do good.


In my opinion, it is clear that the best thing for humanity is the disappearance of religious organizations like the Catholic Church, seeking to have an attitude of rivalry with governments at the political level, from my point of view religion is in schools where it should be taught, but not members of any sect or organization, but by teachers appointed by the school or the interior ministry.

Of course religion should be an example of democracy and open to all ideas and opinions, without imposing the teachings of a forced way does the Catholic religion.

Nor will things necessary as baptism or communion, because in the future merely symbolic as these rituals become too simplistic and will be replaced by education and training in values, each person will believe what they want to believe without dogmas and freedom of thought or expression, the temples are no longer necessary, because the real temple is within each person, because each citizen will be trained from childhood in values, but not from any temple but from the school that is most effective. It may also be drawn to children through other cultural media such as books, and philosophical and moral formation will have a role in education equal to or greater than the other subjects, but will be taught in line with science and free view citizens, so in the future will no longer exist temples, because the temples will be new schools, books and soul of people.


And I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the city, the holy, the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a voice from the throne, saying: Behold the dwelling of God among men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them, and wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more; there will be no more mourning or pain, for the former things are passed away. And he who sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. He also said, Write that these words are faithful and true. And he said, have been fulfilled. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the fountain of the water of life. The winner will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son. More timid and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and fornicators and sorcerers and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake on with fire and brimstone. This is the second death. (Rev 21)



Formerly the classical concept of art was characterized by considering as such representations were made through paintings or sculptures that usually represented the people or things that the authors saw.

However a fact changed this approach to things and it was the advent of photography, which led to the "artists" to make a reflection, what if a camera could do almost perfect images, so then served paintings and pictures they did? His reaction to try to survive was to create the so-called abstract painting, i.e. it was to represent symbolic and not images or scenes that we can commonly be found, so things could argue that what they were doing could no longer be imitated by any photographic camera. In my opinion, this has led to a degeneration of the concept of art which apparently anything goes, an alleged artist can do any squiggle and after a convoluted explanation that no one understands try to convince us that it is art.

But what it is really art? Art is actually all that is well done, well-made furniture is art, a well-made car is too. That obsession with the symbolic of the alleged artists is simply a way to delay his agony before disappearing because society had just sick of its symbolism and fine Postmodernism and stop them credibility.

These "artists" from the abstract, what they have really done is try to survive by representing the psychological and symbolic issues that can not take a picture, but really unlike what they think the symbolism does not work with unintelligible images, because the real key of symbolism is to use understandable images but displayed differently than normal, in order to cause a psychological reaction in those who see it and thus be symbolic, an example of true symbolism would be for example the comic vignettes newspapers.

But those who all they do is a simple squiggle or sculpture meaningless and defense strategy is that the viewer does not understand, what they are doing is tricking society, because according to that rule could all do the same and call art anything, claiming that others do not understand.

From my point of view, the fact that society considers such things as art, only shows that this is a time if you values, which leads her to have an erratic course and a certain blindness in his analysis of things, by the which ends up being manipulated by people without ethics or scruples. It would be desirable for citizens open their eyes and change the situation. Arguably the only positive contribution that these alleged works of art made in the future is used to measure and highlight the degree of confusion on ethical issues present contemporary society as they demonstrate not be able to distinguish fraud from the truth , considering things like art do not deserve this qualification.

A society that were really educated know that this is not art but a deception of those who do and seek to get money and prestige at your expense.

I think in the future the art of symbolism occupy the place that really corresponds to is simply to use these representations in books or magazines, but without giving an excessive value as it is now, because in the future the company will know everything is well done is art and not limited to a partial way some things as some claim.

I would like to make it clear anyway that my critical attitude does not refer to all that is considered art today, but most of the abstract "art" and postmodernist flooding today's society.


It is regrettable to see how being able to choose the easiest and reasonable way, society sometimes chooses the most difficult not because it is better, but for the sake of notoriety by its proponents as a result society suffers unnecessarily. This is in my opinion, the result of a full language approach unnecessarily complex approaches that far from helping learning complicate this matter, especially children without resulting in a clear benefit.

It would be desirable approach in the written language to spoken expression approaching as much as possible, and thus be easier and manageable.

The letter H

An example of this is the letter H, this is a letter in the spoken expression does not exist and therefore it would be best to disappear from the writing, some would say that is used to distinguish words that are spelled the same but with different meanings, but this is an absurd argument, since if confusion in the spoken expression does not occur, why would he have written expression.

The letter G and J

Another change that would favor the student would use the letter G only for expressions of G weak and J only strong expressions, thus greatly simplified the use of this letter and would be minor misspellings in most cases arising from unnecessary spoken decorating arises when written language.

B and V

Another positive change would eliminate the difference between B and V. In the spoken expression there is no difference between these two letters and therefore not have to if any in written expression, the real unit of measure to raise the written language it should be imitate the spoken language, because if a person is expressed with due correction, it makes no sense to then have to write without it. The source of the confusion is due to the words that are before and after these letters that suggest that as the case may be used one or the other.

Y or I

Another example of absurdity is to distinguish between the Y Greek Latin I seems that the objective of linguists out the tormenting students by creating disparate rules of language as that which gave rise to this dispute, since the logical it would be the existence of a single version of the letter I because as I said in the speech spoken this occurs.

LL or Y

So does the difference between LL or Y for the expression (and), this case is also unnecessary differentiation in some cases decide to use some letters and other used other for the same sound.

K and Q or C

Another way to complicate no reason the language is to use these letters in different ways to represent the same sound, seems frivolous by those who have agreed to ward off both the spoken expression written because a desire for notoriety for himself, they have led to unnecessary and unproductive complexity of the written language. You should always use the same letter for the expression (ca), thus equating to simplify the language spoken.


It would also be a clear way to handle the letter R were used, such that one should refer to strong R when two consecutive were used.

C and Z

Another positive step would untie the letter C Z, i.e. only the letter C for example be used to pronounce words like "home", but the word "plum" Z would be used with this system each letter only correspond to sound, using the same letter to indicate different sounds totally unnecessary.

Many people seem strange to consider such language, but that would only be to become familiar with it, just when Europe changed to use the euro many people continued to think about their national when calculations coins, but that does not mean no sense.

Another custom unnecessary is to use Romans to refer to historical dates numbers, this is a custom that what it does is complicate things both children and adults, since the fact that it is commenting on a historical event does not justify use a language or old numbers.

The same can be said regarding the teaching of Latin, this is a language that is no longer used and although there are languages that are derived from it would be logical that this language was studied only by linguists and other citizens they are only exposed in a generic way, it would be good to stop using the packaging of medicines, since in this case gives the impression that they are looking for pharmaceutical companies is to prevent citizens understand the composition of medicines rather than explain its contents.

In short I would stress that, in my opinion, it would be better to create a written language as close as possible to spoken thus language social benefits will be incalculable despite this close the doors to those scholars of language to pretend win a reputation at the expense of creating archaic and unnecessary formalities that the only thing they serve is to entangle and complicate without reason language learning to children and adults.


It is striking that even in those organizations that call themselves altruists speculative behavior as with some NGOs are given, is that in this era of contradictions usual is that things are the opposite of what they seem, an example of this are certain NGOs on the one hand facing society who want to fight against hunger in the world raising money for buying food, but while still leaving in second place the real cause of malnutrition is the fact that in developing countries it is common that all economic growth is to invest in an increase of the population remains poor. That is what is not logical, is that those who are at the poverty line, however invest all their profits to form large families, so if NGOs wanted to help these people first have to do is fight overpopulation is the greatest evil of the countries that have this problem, i.e. it is necessary to train both governments and people in a policy of birth control, because poor with children making is causing more poverty, precisely China was courageous on this issue, because it created a program to prevent excessive population growth and today is one of the countries with the highest economic growth in the world, its policy of birth control can be improved , but clearly they were brave and pioneering consider this important issue as a way to combat poverty and approaching the level of progress of the West.

Another thing that NGOs should not fall is never in pro terrorists or illegal behaviors that often delve, is that it is tempting for these organizations resort to these behaviors by diffusion that is made of them in the media communication, i.e. the use of violence or illegality media respond by asking them a free advertising campaign that is what really pursue, but with these attitudes are discredited and themselves and cast doubt on what are their true intentions.

It should be borne in mind that the end of the NGOs in the background are companies that have revenues and expenses easy for them to move from altruistic motives to mere profit motive and citizens before making a donation to one of these organizations should ask how many of them displayed so publishes its balance of income and expenses as proof of his good intentions.


While reading my other books the reader will have noticed to some issues different paths arise, this is because science and especially philosophy is not something that has to be conditioned to a single path of evolution or scientific pattern, explanation it is very simple, is that progress is not to substitute something bad for something good but substitute something good that has been true for some time for something better, only time will determine what things are consolidated and which others disappear, but even those that persist can not guarantee to do so indefinitely. Therefore, in my books I have tried to teach readers to consider free thought and research as part of the values that should be part of the future of man.

An example of this scientific duality is for example the spacecraft have to leave the atmosphere to be placed in orbit, in this case wont readers the possibility of using ships of stages or the majority deposit, both models ships have their advantages and disadvantages, for example to define as would craft steps summarize saying that these ships would be formed by a power module elevator comprising an unmanned and larger volume charge to provide the major impetus for the manned spacecraft and most fuel lift, then the manned in front of the power module. Once this set come closer to space, the two ships would be separated and would only continue to orbit manned and most important ship also transported the crew and payload. Ship majority tank would also be feasible in which fuel and cargo would go on the same ship occupying fuel majority section and load the minority section mainly at the head of the ship, the downside is that this model would consume more fuel even avoid having to use the various stages to later return and reuse.

As for interstellar travel the staging system would be similar to the above, i.e. the ships would be divided into two main sections in which the first and biggest lead engines and fuel acceleration and second payload and fuel necessary for braking once the fuel acceleration consumed the two sections would be separated and the payload section could use all the remaining fuel for braking, in this case the module launch not be hindered by any cause would continue for the space to collide with a star or an uninhabited planet.

With the majority system tank ship is not divided into two sections and would move to their destination in one piece, but having to allocate part of the fuel to slow the acceleration section, this will would reach a lower speed, but Instead, the ship would have a more compact image throughout the trip and could use the initial thrust section for other purposes.

Another example of the different ways that science will offer the man of the future is the choice of whether to life in planetary orbit or on the surface of planets and moons in space would benefit from a perfect artificial gravity by the use of centrifugal systems, a transparent atmosphere and solar energy abundant, instead choosing to remain on the surface could have all planetary resources without having to bridge the gap to the space and also could be used indefinitely avoiding loss of the reaction gases that would use the ships in space.

In the worlds of low gravity could counteract the loss of muscle mass through increased statures, also to emulate gravity and facilitate travel on foot could be installed magnetic fibers in the shoes and lower parts of the pants and through a field magnetic installed below ground foot traffic of citizens favor, would also help prevent the loss of muscle mass to give preference to manual labor on using machines.

But in space there would be these problems seriously, but would others like the distance to the planet and the consequent difficulties in accessing resources or to make sightseeing trips, difficulties to protect from meteorites or cosmic radiation or problems which causes the need to avoid the loss of the reaction gases ships, these decisions will correspond solve succeeding societies will have to choose one path or another without being very clear which is best.

Whether or not the centrifugal system was imposed to generate gravity in space, another topic of discussion would be if the ships small cars or transshipment should carry centrifugal or gravity, the cause is very simple and is in the ships nurse rotational drums would very large and the crew hardly would notice the curvature in the different sections or cockpits, but the small ships that would be different and curvature could be visible and annoying, why you could choose to design these fully verticalized ships and served only gravity magnetic as an adjunct to gravity already have on the mother ships or on planets that would descend so, however some people might think that these ships should also have rotational drums of gravity, these drums probably would focus on their structure by a process of structural duplicity and benefit from this type of Gravity, in this case the curvature of the cockpits would be considered as secondary and get the centrifugal gravity as most important to consider that should be common to all ships.

Another topic of discussion is as it should be the ideal clothes of the future, I propose a suit one piece and color, but it would be different for each person and office, however this is open to different options and paths subject and only time will tell which is the best.

Unlike philosophy, technical issues that affect humans are much broader and more moldable than one might think and often the key to finding the best solution depends not only on scientific analysis but also the tastes and sensibilities of people.

Therefore, it could be said that the progress of science seems the result of competition between different options and the difference between them often is scarce, but the best option is one that outperforms other even for a little, why not easy to clarify this issue.


A failure that occurs frequently in the way of putting education to children is known to not tell how it is to be applied to a model of compulsory education other than what is not, and is often They raise the two as if they were the same thing when there are important differences it is important to highlight. And it is that all education should be mandatory nature while having a soft profile and easy to learn precisely because of its mandatory character, i.e. a mix between play and learning. Another feature of this type of education should be a reduced requirement to pass each course requirements. Otherwise, you run the risk of traumatize children in their childhood, be demanded some approaches and rhythms of study that do not fit your personality and more importantly at this stage of life education is done without pressure, to avoid damage to its sensitivity and prevent children reject learning.

On the other hand, it is different when education is voluntary and requested by the student, especially as an adult, in this case it is logical to have a more strict and demanding structure not to have existed conditioning to the student to carry out such studies and also for having old enough to decide what you want.


It is a great mistake to confuse a premature adult with an intelligent child, premature adults are children who have the personality of an adult and that gives them greater concentration and a more pronounced character, which does not mean being smarter . Indeed, nature did that children have a lower capacity than adults to develop a personality that could well acquire sufficient knowledge before forming a definite personality. With premature adults this happens very soon, but in return, the risk of having a personality with immature and hasty judgments run. Unfortunately, these children upon reaching adulthood longer than the others, except for the belief of those who consider them smarter or additional training that you were able to give them.

The real smart kid is not known for going very advantaged in school, but have a different and imaginative personality, prone even not easily follow the system or rhythm that the school will make, so it is possible that in some cases go most behind in their studies and not ahead premature as with adults, although each case is different. Anyway it is best not to separate children based on these concepts, since the risk of flatter them you run, which could harm the process of education. Is much better than when education is compulsory, consider all the sensibilities of children and the process of learning to be simple and affordable to every form of being.


It is also a misconception that a soft attitude is always preferable in the education of children, since although in general education taught in schools is better this method, however, in the moral order does not work the same way, since which it is in childhood when you can form a healthy personality in children and when parents and educators need to act, i.e. for proper moral education is necessary for those involved in the education try to teach children the difference between good and evil so that they know that all iniquitous and reprehensible conduct by them should have an answer equal and opposite by educators, just as all correct behavior by children must also be matched with a attitude reward from educators. If the opportunity to be morally children in childhood is lost is a risk of them becoming misfits and incapable adults know the difference between what up to them and what belongs to others or put another so they can think whatever they do will not find punishment even knowing their actions be illegal for having been too overprotected in childhood. No better is the father who merely give money to their children and never punish them. The ideal father should on the one hand reward their children for their right actions, but also be willing to punish wrong when done knowingly be wrong. Childhood is when children have their personality undefined and therefore is at this point that corresponds this type of training. To miss this opportunity, on reaching adulthood it will be more difficult to correct deviant attitude and the child could end up being a despot and unhappy adult who collide continuously with other citizens, until eventually the possibility is given that understand their error.

It is also important to stress that it is at school where you have to be religious philosophical education or, since this subject is by no means inferior to other value, but must be free from outside interference as sects or private religious organizations such as Catholic. It is the state and parent associations are competent to determine how it has to be this training and not others, of course this education must be free of taboos and superstitions and go as consistent with science as possible, but without that's a detriment to his philosophical component.


Another barbaric custom of contemporary society, is to use the suffering of animals as part of entertainment in some festive events. Actually this kind of thing what it actually does is criminalize the animal before mistreat, i.e., it is a psychological game macabre in which people hide their own evil through play Presumably the bad is the so you can mistreat animals, just that what the Nazis did with the Jews or the American colonists with native Indians.

It is true that an animal is not a person, but that does not mean it's right to make of them what you want, not so long that the same treatment is given to people subjected to slavery ago and today that's what some do with animals.

It is also a fallacy to say that if these animals are not used in that kind of race will disappear parties, one example is the case of bulls. These people forget that the species of these animals are derived existed many millions of years before that barbaric custom start to exist, and these animals disappear what they would do is return to their natural environment, even if it meant some changes physical, but it is in the natural environment where they should be and not as mere slaves of people.

Another barbaric custom is to have caged birds. In this case as with slavery only takes into account the interests of the owners, but the animal is considered as a mere object without rights or feelings, whose sole purpose is to entertain those who caged them.

The same goes for the circus, where animals are made to perform ridiculous stunts in exchange for food in an example of complete disregard to their natural way of life.

Those who claim to be against slavery-like practices should also demonstrate applying the treatment to animals. It would be desirable that countries in their laws establish as a basic rule the rejection of the unnecessary suffering of animals were a role model for others.


Arguably, both film and sports are intended to keep our awake to a risk senses, because in reality what is done in them is to represent apparent way a conflict or violence but symbolically, is say that these games or cinematic representations serve us as a way to keep our senses awake and trained at the risk of a real problem, therefore both symbolic confrontations represented in films such as those that occur in sports are socially useful.

However it must be said that the accumulation of sports competitions simultaneously as with the Olympics are not socially useful, since it is alienating them having to play multiple types of competition at the same time and in one place, it is better each sport made its global separately and in different for the sake of all dates.

On the other hand, both film and sports should be the market that determines what things should succeed and what not, and governments should stop meddling in financing certain movies or sports activities, as it is the public who democratically and by paying their tickets who must determine that sports or film productions which must grow and disappear. Too often it is the case that a film financed with public money then is not even issued, or is issued receive a total rejection of the public, just as there are competitions prefabricated by governments such as those commonly found on Olympics sole purpose of which is mere political propaganda of governments that finance them. It would therefore be desirable for those sports that can survive by themselves privately and independently continue to exist, otherwise, just more than film or sport can end up being a mere instrument of corruption or political propaganda.


The only way to get a mass medium such as roads prove a secure environment is by implementing rules of movement but can not meet all the expectations of drivers however allow a safe and valid means for most of people and vehicles.

Therefore, it would be good to create a system that traffic lanes with only one lane in each direction overtaking between equipped motor vehicles is prohibited from in order to avoid the possibility of exceeding the opposite lane at the risk of frontal collision or out of the driveway that this entails. It should be borne in mind that in this type of road vehicles going in opposite directions have to go so close to each other that practically touch is unreasonable then be allowed to exceed the rails to the opposite side when this can be avoid, so this rule would be feasible to establish a mandatory minimum necessary speed for all motor vehicles to allow circulation fluently without having to leave the lane. This rate may not be very high because of the excessive risk of collision that comes from being the tracks so close to each other and to the most people and vehicles can use, of course on the way to two lanes for each direction this rule would not apply. These rules may seem restrictive, but avoid accidents and protect the different types of drivers using the roads to prioritize safety over speed.

The cause of the confusion is that long-engine vehicles and those without it have shared the same roads thereby giving rise to the need for overtaking, but that does not justify and motorized vehicles are ahead each other invading the opposite lane with the risk that entails.

It is surprising that governments claim to be concerned about the high rate of traffic accidents that occur every year in the world, and yet not dare to face the solution of the problem arises here.

Perhaps the reader seems to him that this issue does not have the importance that I give in this book, but if this problem would have personally affected him or anyone in your family understand that is not a trivial issue, but first order, given the lot of accidents and deaths that occur every year in the world, many of them because the problem here expound. In a collective means such as traffic, the particular interests of drivers must always be behind groups and governments must have the courage and common sense to make that clear.



Is a big mistake mythologizing is being done sun in contemporary society, some thousands of years ago humans began to lose hair that covered his body precisely because it happened to use the clothes, i.e. the hair served the function a protective layer to the skin of dangerous solar radiation.

But today this desire to show a dark appearance due to a mistaken overestimation of this fact has led society to an alarming increase in cases of skin cancer.

The myth of the beneficial effect of the sun, based on the argument that produces vitamin D, which has led society is exposed to the sun without proper protection required by the situation. It is true that the sun is beneficial to health or moderate exposure favors the development of vitamin D, but exposure is received through the face or arms is more than enough to generate the necessary vitamin and everything others enter the realm of myth and fads.

The truth is that the skin needs continued protection against solar radiation except in exceptional cases and sun exposure as the ultimate goal is a mistake also the remedy for some diseases is not necessarily the sun but the heat is another of its effects.

Therefore, sun exposure as an end and the half-naked body should be ruled out of social practices and medical recommendations, because apart from the helplessness that the skin has no clothes, there is another effect caused by the sun which is premature aging.

The real cause of the mythologizing of sun originated in the fact that in the early twentieth century tended to associate dark skin tone with a higher economic level and therefore get that tone became a target priority for broad social strata. The explanation is simple and is that before the industrial revolution, the color brown was associated with poverty and work in the field, but with industrialization the workers went to work in factories and workshops sheltered from the sun, is when the dark tone became considered a symbol of leisure and high economic level.

The unfortunate thing is that doctors were carried away by this fashion and condescended into a mystification of sun exposure underestimating the risks involved and that in any case or only in very exceptional cases should recommend direct exposure to radiation from large body areas.



It is a big mistake to trust a state of great optimism, he who is so what it does is let our guard down and stay more exposed to the risks of accident or life problems. The most logical is placed in a mental state that could be said to be found in the average of optimism and depression, thus the brain is more predisposed to be able to adapt to any sudden state of mind that might arise. The ideal of course is to be happy, but one of the causes of happiness is precisely balanced flow of the circumstances of life and excessive optimism should only be exceptionally something right.

Much vanity to think that everything will go well forever because this is an unrealistic attitude that ignores the fact that we are all exposed to have slumps or accidents, since the events that happen to us not all depend on our own will , great empires that believed omnipotent as the Roman fell when it seemed almost impossible. This shows that when things are going well it is advisable not to fall into the easy vanity to think that things can not change and act prudently and with the humility of spirit trying to be happy, but without thinking that one is safe from the problems that may be our neighbors.


Arguably, there are two forms of depression, would be caused by a problem and other serious caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, in the event that depression was caused by a situational problem or annoyance best to fix it momentarily stop and analyze the problem calmly and carefully. For this, the brain causes the sufferer in a state of dejection that deep down you're looking to increase the level of concentration and enable the person to stop and resolve the situation that causes discouragement. Another reason is that depression try to reduce the state of nervous tension that could lead to brain damage or otherwise.

Who suffers from depression usually ordinary type caused by a problem this state of despondency ceases the moment that the person finds the solution to it. It should be added that trying to solve drug problems is a big mistake, because besides not solve the drugs they do is mask the problem, use is a little courageous act and what results you happen to have a problem to have two as drugs disrupt the normal flow of the brain in addition to producing addition. It should be borne in mind that when we have a problem it is normal to be sad as a way to adapt to it and therefore it is best to find a solution as a way to recover the spirit, anyway drugs not only do not solve it also they force the brain to an artificial stimulus, when what it needs is to follow your own path natural way to overcome the problem. It is logical that if we have a problem that it is reasonable to be sad, self or physician us stimulant-type substances, because it would be meaningless to hinder our recovery. In addition, there are a thousand natural and healthy ways to recover the mood without drugs. In any case first be sought the solution to the problem and then recovery mood.


Instead, the process is different from a chemical depression. In this case, this is not caused by a problem of vital situational or psychological, but by a chemical imbalance caused by different causes or illness. In this case the person feels depressed and do not know why, then tries to find an explanation and searches the first thing that comes to mind. But try to find a solution to the problem through an analysis is unwise, because it is not psychological but chemical problem, such as a drop in blood sugar. Therefore, it is more appropriate to leave the mind blank until the effect or attempt to counteract pass through exercise. In this case as in the above, try to disguise it with stimulant drugs would also be wrong, because apart from drugs that can fix the imbalance, can be searched, as in the previous case, natural entertainment without side effects.


Paradoxically, the sun can also be a depressing factor when a person is satisfied with their situation the sun can be very stimulating and produce a feeling of joy but there are people that have concerns or a state of emotional decay sun them can produce the opposite effect, this is because these people feel as examined to think about things they could do in those days of pleasant weather and yet can not perform.

On the other hand, excessive sunshine may cause some people a situation of discomfort and nervousness similar to epilepsy process, i.e., the light intensity can be disturbing to interact with the nervous system, but in no case means they lose their ability to reason, this increased sensitivity to the sun occurs mostly in the spring and early summer and in some cases may be related to a viral process similar to that causing brain cold but need not excessive given importance.


Many people wonder why if the teeth are designed by nature to chew food, how could yet so vulnerable to decay? The answer is very simple and teeth like the rest of the parts forming the body has to fulfill conditions for healthy and function effectively.

The key is that the person must keep your teeth clean most of the time as possible, this does not mean you have to be using the toothbrush continuously, since this could also be counterproductive to lead to a swelling of gums with brushing your teeth once a day before going to bed is enough, therefore it is only right that adults divide the day into four meals and the intermediate period between each meal only water is ingested if possible and this does not cause tooth decay, after every meal requirement is necessary to rinse your teeth with water to remove food debris. With these simple tips you can avoid such an unpleasant decay and maintain healthy teeth, everything is a matter of assuming normally dividing the day into two main blocks, one majority, in which no food is not eaten and where They stay clean teeth, and another minority in which we dedicated ourselves to eat but always followed by a mouthwash. Except in exceptional cases in the period between meals ingest only water, but to consume a product, followed by rinsing process is repeated.

For young children, this would be different because they need to have a rate of more continuous meals, why nature has given them the opportunity to renew their teeth before reaching adulthood, and thus release some new teeth so have the possibility of entering adulthood without damage from the previous period, in which cycles meals were not so separate and therefore there was increased risk of caries.


It is a fallacy to think that one can do what he wants with his body and then consume certain medicines believing that all problems will be solved health, because such a belief is false and pretentious.

One of the causes of many diseases is precisely obesity, when a person consumes food that does not need, what it does is put your body in an embarrassing situation of having to process, store and transport these reserves do missing all these extra efforts they do is cause premature aging of the organism as well as causing excess cholesterol and heart attacks. It is unfortunate that there are still those who praise obesity as if it were a choice like any other, when it is clear that this is a deviation from normal body balanced state.

It is also a fallacy deny that is by eating foods such as obesity occurs, although it is also true that in many cases begin with a genetic flaw that causes a feeling of hunger continuously to those who suffer and therefore control diet in these circumstances it becomes complicated.

A good way to combat obesity would divide the day into four meals exclusively throughout the day only water is consumed. In turn these four meals would be divided into two large and two small that will happen rhythmically, i.e. a small breakfast would happen a big meal and a small snack would happen a big dinner. You can also change the order so that the breakfast is great and the midday meal is small, that would be at the discretion of each, a limited number of foods allows the stomach fills easily and so can fight the feeling hunger, in the case of children the number of meals could be higher because they are in the growth phase.

The problem of Western countries is that only talks about taking more vitamins, more protein or other foods like better health was equivalent to increased food intake, in fact arguably in these countries fifty percent of the population has some extra weight that has come to be considered normal by the majority of the population ingesting a quantity of food and especially excessive fat throughout the day.

The war against obesity can not win resorting to diets called miracle, characterized by its suddenness and so sudden act, but by a firm in controlling the calories throughout lifelong attitude.

In any case the subject of diet is not an irrelevant question because the quality of life depends on many aspects of it, a balanced body is essential for a happy life, also prevents many disorders and diseases so look for the dietary balance it is an art worth worrying about it.


The best way to maintain good health is certainly a mainly vegetarian diet, i.e. a diet that includes fruits and vegetables.

The myth of the flesh is a belief that should be banished from society, because plant foods surpass in every way the flesh because in them you can get both protein and mineral fats or vitamins without being certain that it is necessary to resort meat as a food source is more ideally society was as far as possible by substituting such food source for vegetable.

It is also well known the negative effect they have health animal fats, so they endeavor to defend its consumption is dangerous and inadvisable. We must not forget that in nature there are many animals that eat only vegetables and yet are perfectly healthy.


Drug understood as a stimulant that negatively disrupts the normal flow of the body and addictive arguably one of the most damaging things in the history of mankind, but curiously comparable to other social evil is the lack of freedom.

Actually right if you want to have a healthy lifestyle is the eradication of lifestyle consumption of any of these narcotic substances including of course alcohol and snuff, because not for the fact that these two common and widespread substances leave by it being profoundly negative consequences for society, because they are the cause of most deaths all. It is therefore paradoxical that some governments say they are fighting these products while finance their production.

It is also paradoxical policy condescension of some governments who cause harm to others drunk, since this policy that considers extenuating in a trial being drunk during the commission of a crime, all he does is on the one hand protect alcohol and other causes defenseless victims. This is a cynical and contradictory policy that does not contribute to society to favor healthy lifestyles. It is also a mistake to trivialize and divert the problem simply stating that it is a disease to consume alcohol requires the conscious intention to do so and adding only occurs over time, after maintaining this habit continuously. Therefore it is first vice consumption of drugs and only then comes the addition, and this state of addition can also be eradicated with a firm attitude sufferer especially if you ask for help. It should be borne in mind that whoever commits a crime while intoxicated may have at that time his diminished mental faculties, but if that person is an adult knows the effect of alcohol on the body and therefore is also free decide not to take knowing the effects it causes. It is the conceited behavior of some people which leads them to drug use, as these what they do is inflate his ego, in other cases can influence an inferiority complex, but they are free to seek the solution to healthy methods and not fall how easy to fool with drugs.

For this reason, when some government policies pose to mitigate sentences for those who commit crimes while intoxicated, what they do is make the problem worse, since the message is sent to the company is that they can do whatever they want if drunk, behind the government will protect them. If one is adult to exercise their freedom, must also be to suffer the effects of the law, an adult knows the effects that alcohol has on the body and is free to not take it, or if it does, you can give up things like drive. Therefore the law should not look at these things by setting their sentences, or at least consider as aggravating, but never as mitigating.

Another bad habit of politics is to try to protect citizens as if they were minors by establishing penalties for conduct detrimental to health things, keep in mind that the state should only advise citizens on healthier to follow customs, but not You should meddle in free will, because such a temptation is leading to a rift between society and government, leading to the emergence of mafia organizations which are in fact as parallel mini governments supported by their customers. It is true that drugs are harmful to health, but the government must convince citizens it peacefully and without violating their freedom of choice. The same goes for prostitution, it is desirable that this practice does not exist, but to achieve this is not justifiable abuse and persecution of those engaged in it, but rather we must create the conditions for social assistance to enable these people out marginality, it is very easy to ban these things, but if you want to eradicate must first address the problems of social exclusion and help these people.

Precisely because of the desire of governments to interfere in the free will of citizens on health issues, is what appeared mafias which emerged in the early twentieth century in the United States, the paradox is that these mafias even within illegality somehow represented an expression of social justice claim to disobey the laws aimed at limiting government social rights. It is for this reason that the mafias are great, because the fact that one thing is insane does not mean it has to be illegal, and if citizens believe that the prohibition is not correct tend to disobey and therefore creates a parallel power that has been resulting in a sad clash between police and citizens. Sometimes these mafias become so powerful that reach cause real civil wars as in Mexico and Colombia to be producing or drug transit countries, many blame for it is the United States trying to impose its policy on drugs to these thus inducing countries to confrontation between them.

The right thing would be that in every country in the world distinguish between what is harmful and what is illegal, so not because one thing is insane have bound to be illegal, because every adult should be respected in their free will and that it can decide to purchase or freely takes governments, they should do is fight drugs in the cultural aspect, advising and guiding society to the leave, and those who fall in adding help them out of it but under the principle of free will in trade or consumption of these substances. So mafias disappear and the absence of restrictive governments towards citizens and countries that suffer from it would return to a situation of peace liberties.

Ultimately it is right that governments on the one hand respect the right of citizens to consume or trade in these substances however objectionable they may be, but on the other require the appropriate penalty for the commission of crimes under the influence of them or payment of medical costs as appropriate. It is with these measures seeking respect but also jointly responsible citizens with their actions, what truly contribute to society overcomes in its fight against drugs.


In the future, unlike now, the number of offspring that may have be limited to only two children per couple. This is because each planet has a cap of inhabitants possible number, i.e. the implementation of policies of birth control that prevent the number of inhabitants pass to avoid overcrowding and overpopulation in all advanced worlds is necessary the number established as sustainable.

This is not an irrelevant issue because it determines the quality of life of all citizens, the number of children would be limited by law to two per couple and only three possible in the event of an unexpected death occurs by accident, to give a couple the option of having three children this death would be solved in the number of inhabitants.

Because of these circumstances, the fact that a couple had three children without state permission could result in financial penalties for parents, as this would jeopardize the policy of birth control and could lead to another couple will confine the number of children one way to correct the imbalance.

It is also true that the fatal accidents occasionally occur, these children could have as excess could be used to correct this loss, but keep in mind that the figures either case does not have to coincide.


It is a great mistake to think that sex only makes sense in the case of wanting to have children, the reason is very simple, is that the mechanisms of sexual stimulation work continuously like other bodily stimuli, i.e. the same way one is hungry on a regular basis, also feel sexual desires.

However, it is also true that every human being is able to decide whether to have children or not, especially by the fact that sex can be controlled so that it reaches the consummation or not the same and avoid the risk of pregnancy.

That is, in the future, because of legal restrictions that would limit the possible descendants two per couple, you could choose to split the two modalities sex.


Full sexuality, would be that in the period of life of couples in which these could have children, sex would have no restrictions of any kind, not existing fear of possible sanctions from the state since have not yet completed their quota allowed two children, then they could have sex without fear of unwanted pregnancies. This does not mean that pregnancies are taken on what to produce immediately, since man can control to some extent the process by which the seminal fluid reaches women, and thus not precipitate until the desired time achieving the pregnancy. This method of birth control you may be called method seminal control and flow of this element can be controlled voluntarily and thus the period in which a couple can perform complete sexual acts do not have that limited in time and only they decide when they want that pregnancy occurs. Also keep in mind that this is not a perfect and about method to fifteen percent of cases remain in state ahead of schedule, but that would not matter because they have completed their quota of two children and therefore that pregnancy would be accepted factly.

In the case of incomplete sexual intercourse would be made without the full consummation of the act, this would be because it would be couples who already have had two children that the law allows as how to have safe sex prevent the consummation of the act completely thus there would be no risk of pregnancy, i.e. in sex all the elements of sex but without full consummation of it they would be included.

It should be borne in mind that to satisfy the sexual desires can be used different methods and only in case you want to have children consummation of the entire event is necessary.


Another controversial issue is contraception in principle I believe that the only or best contraceptive method is condoms because this method fully respects human nature and avoids the use of chemicals that basically can only be harmful to health, as I said before intercourse need not be limited to having children, since sexual desires occur normally during large parts of our lives and therefore what is to separate what is sexuality in order to have offspring than not, therefore condoms may be useful in this field. However it must be said that in the future and because of the restrictions on the number of possible children and the defects in condoms as the risk of breakage or lack of realism in relationships, couples may simply choose to forgo keep sex completely, it i.e. that although would perform sexual acts on a regular basis however opt for these relationships do not end up in the consummation of the act, thus also avoid externalizing these relationships by having to acquire and produce condoms and also the fear of unwanted pregnancies and the subsequent state would avoid punishment.

It is also true that opt for the use of condoms the number of unwanted pregnancies could be reduced by combining the use of this device with the method of seminal control, but there would be no complete safety, although children born so unforeseen could replace lost by accident, but keep in mind that these figures may not match and therefore not serve as a means of population control, especially because in the worlds advanced accidental deaths would be very slim.


In the late nineteenth century, emerged from the feminist movement's claim that the law's allowed to end the life of their unborn children and so finally consummate their realization as men, and that abortion is a great abomination for which feminists in an almost ritual proclaim their renunciation of sex and character of women by sacrificing their own children because they are precisely the children who determines and defines a majority forms the lives of women, this praise of abortion and the excessive desire to imitate the life of men is what has led to premature aging of Western society and submission to colonization and foreign immigration.

Those who claim that the aging of the European population should be supplemented with immigrants do so because they love or their race, or culture, or society, and only value feminist topics that are causing the racial suicide. It's easy to fall into the comfort of saying that women have the right to fulfill themselves as men, but it is a great act of hypocrisy not to see that the western population is aging at accelerated speed and it is not logical to expect that other cultures or societies replace because it is the duty of every citizen to fight for the defense of their society race or culture and not expect so scary that others will solve the problem. It is therefore necessary to end the feminist myth and promote policies that disturb birth but women who consider having children as a hindrance in performing their job prospects.

From my point of view, it is right that every child conceived voluntarily continue until normal birth. It is a fallacy to argue about whether it is human or not, because those who do not wish to have children have it easy and abstain from sex or perform them safely, but pretend the one hand have sex without control and the other say that they have been unknowingly state is an act of supreme hypocrisy and stupidity. Children do not come by chance nor is it something that only happens to the poor as some would claim. The decision to become pregnant or should not be decided in advance to sex and it is not logical after the act blame the unborn let alone finance abortions with public money, because first is prevention before the problem occurs and not the other way around. Because when a child is conceived no longer it makes sense to argue about it and it makes sense to let the pregnancy continue its course and relevant by the state would provide all possible help to the expectant mother.

However if for some reason a pregnant woman does not feel interested to raise her unborn child, it is good that the state surrender to those couples who for some reason could not have children, and mutual benefit would be made.

It is also a fallacy to say that a woman is young to have a child, but it is not to stay in state, keep in mind that if nature has given to a woman's ability to become pregnant at a given time, is because your body is ready for it, but in any case the state has a duty to help the woman to continue the pregnancy safely to reach a successful conclusion.


In my opinion, society has chosen the wrong way on the issue of organ transplants I think it's a serious mistake to use the bodies to try to solve the problems of living, this policy puts man at the level of Scavengers and I think those behaviors should be unworthy of the human species.

If all scientific and economic efforts had been devoted to the production of artificial organs, at the moment surely many organs of artificial origin whose quality is much assimilate into the natives already have, and that eventually it would become thus, investments in transplants they do is delay this time to the detriment of patients.

Furthermore, it is popularizing the savage custom of transplanting organs from a living to other people, which is an unfortunate practice because it happens to have a person with disabilities to have two.

It would be desirable for society to demand their governments and pharmaceutical companies changing their patterns of behavior, to orient their research towards mass production of artificial organs of good quality that allow end waiting lists by patients.

It is not fair that the sick are forced to wait for someone's death to be eligible for an organ, the deceased should leave them on their way unhindered and living should solve their problems without resorting to the bodies of those already they are not among us.


Instead the issue of transfusions is different, because the blood is recoverable, a person who makes a donation can recover quickly blood flow so that these donations can not be considered as an organ transplant. But people should be zealous in this matter and will not accept donate blood until governments require every citizen's obligation to make a donation in exchange eligible to receive another. It is not logical that a person is donating for altruistic purposes without receiving anything in return, and yet others are receiving frequent blood and refuse to donate, that's a contradiction and a naivete on the part of donors, is correct help but also demanding justice to the state on issues that may be, for it could create a primer donor why only those who have made a donation and only the would could then opt to receive blood from those reserves.


In fact, the origin of the disease is in most cases the stubbornness of people who do not respect nature and requirements of your own body, mistakenly carried away by unwholesome vices and mistreat your body into thinking that a miracle drug you can remedy the evil, but that's a fallacy because if the causes that cause diseases are not suppressed medicines only thing they will do is make symptoms worse or create new diseases, because in fact the diseases are nothing but imbalances in energy our body, caused by our bad lifestyle habits such as drug use among which I include snuff and alcohol, or overeating that causes obesity, cholesterol, and premature aging of the organism, as well as countless additional diseases . It is therefore necessary to begin to respect our own bodies and take into account its own requirements and natural processes and thus will be much harder sick. In any case of the disease occur, first to solve the problem is to analyze the behavior itself, because in most cases it is the misleading use of our body what causes them and therefore amend the erroneous behavior what solves. Otherwise, it is when drugs or other treatments are necessary, but it must always be after the previous step, for medicines, although very useful in certain cases, be used in excess can also cause new diseases.


I would stress that a pregnant woman is not a sick woman and the habit of asking to lie horizontally to give birth is extremely dangerous, because that difficult time is the birth, in which the woman has to make great efforts, if it is placed horizontally it may happen that excess blood reaches the head, with the risk of stroke, also placed in a more upright position, could serve as the aid of gravity to facilitate movement of the child to the exit.


One of the biggest scourges of modern society are genetic diseases, these diseases seem a kind of divine curse but yet are easily removable, for this scientific analysis of those affected and monitored by the state is only necessary eradicate them.

An easy procedure would be for all the people who were carriers of these diseases only had legal permission to have only one child per couple, the reason is obvious and so these genes sick would disappear gradually having fewer offspring than healthy people . Another way may be the manipulation of eggs and sperm to eliminate genes that transmit the disease, but the risk of causing birth defects or other new problems run. It could also pose as a solution that the carriers of these genes simply renounce having children and in return would switch to take precedence when adopting orphans and malignant diseases such chain would be extinguished.


It is a great mistake to try to escape the pain abusing anti-inflammatory, for mild pain must not automatically associate a disease. Sometimes it is indicating a process of adaptation and change our body to surrounding environment and disturb it with medication backfires, sometimes, as in the case of some infections, the inflammatory process facilitates the arrival of antibodies to the area infected and thereby eliminate the infection. Of course high fever must fight the risk of serious harm involved, but when it is mild it may be useful to promote blood flow and access of antibodies to the infected area.

As bacteria and viruses function in nature is not cause harm to people necessarily, because its mission is to break down dead matter and prevent the world from becoming a mass of waste without recycling. However when bacteria enter a weak body the process is similar to if dead and bacteria they do is try to break it down and reduce it to its basic elements, this does not mean looking the wrong people, because these classes epidemics have more to do with malnutrition or other similar causes that weaken the natural defenses. Sometimes the problem is the lack of knowledge by the immune system of new virus, which causes a slow reaction to infection. It should be borne in mind that the human body is full of all kinds of bacteria, but not cause damage to be in balance with the immune system that regulates the amount of course contact with an excessive amount of bacteria or viruses can get sick or kill, but that does not mean that their role in nature is that.

As for cold or flu viruses that cause are common and well known to the immune system type, but the reason of getting sick is because these viruses only come into contact with the body occasionally, so that when this occurs the number of antibodies or specialized against that virus is low, therefore the disease process is taken for the body to identify the virus and generating the number of antibodies required to remove it. Once the infection is cleared, the antibodies down again and the process begins again. In this regard it should be stressed that the role in healing not have medicines but usually the immune system itself, therefore these types of diseases they could be defined as reversible.

Arguably the fight of antibodies against the virus also represents the struggle of life over death and in many cases this ongoing conflict is to determine the lifespan of many living beings, as he approached his old age capacity defenses decreases.

Viruses can also be responsible for numerous cases of headache in spring and summer. They can also cause irritability and winter flu already known, it is true that bacteria and viruses are responsible for causing great suffering to mankind, however this does not mean that is your real goal.


Another practice that should banish all the earth is the mutilation of body organs or skin, are savage practices both those made to the sexual organs of women like circumcision made to men and is an example of progress that governments dared to confront them, at least while they were minors. Practices can also be considered objectionable habit of making holes in the ears of girls or aberrant habit of tattooing the skin, often irreversibly. You need to understand that nature gave humans a perfect body and that progress that fit to come will not be using that kind of practice, but by the natural evolution of biology.


Man in an act of greed, but also ignorance, forget the great use of natural resources and enters experimenting with things like nuclear energy is extremely dangerous. The source from which comes this energy is the same energy which is derived in the stars. This energy is very powerful, but used in a closed as the terrestrial ecosystem may result in serious damage to the population in case of leakage occur means. Once the radioactivity is deposited on earth, you can pollute for centuries and with it the waters of the rivers. What is truly surprising is that there a source of inexhaustible and clean energy like the sun, obstinate man to resort to pollutants and dangerous as nuclear power means.

As for oil, it is well known that will not last forever and is also changing in a gradual way the Earth's climate with the damage to agriculture arising also must not forget the serious ecological damage posed by spills in case of accident during transport by sea.

Therefore, it is not about how to get more energy but how to get it without incurring damage to the environment and also sustainable. The solution is clear, should empower all energy derived from the sun either directly or indirectly, such as hydropower, solar, geothermal and wind energy, as nuclear energy is better restrict use only the space where the light the sun does not reach, especially for travel between the stars.


And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound. And the first sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, they were cast upon the earth, and was burned a third of the earth; and it was burned a third of the trees, and all green grass was burned. And he sounded the second angel, and something like a huge mountain on fire was thrown into the sea, and the third of the sea became blood. And the third part of the living creatures in the sea, and the third part of the ships were destroyed. And played trumpet the third angel and rushed from heaven a great star, blazing like a torch: it fell upon the third part of the rivers and springs of water. The name of the star is Wormwood; and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters because they were made bitter. And he sounded the fourth angel and was wounded a third of the sun and a third of the moon and the third part of the stars, so that the third part of them was darkened, and the day lost a third of its light and the same evening. And I saw and heard as it flew through the sky an eagle saying with a loud voice: ¡Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts missing three angels who have yet to play! (Rev 8:6)


It has been much discussion about why living beings have long life expectations and instead others shorter. The explanation is very simple, the cause is accidents that each species has in the course of their lives, i.e. when an animal during its life suffers accidents or wear factors such as predation, nature does is speed up your metabolism in order to repair the damage as quickly as possible, but as a result, also suffers a premature aging, i.e. the duration of life is directly related to the life expectancy of each species, so a process both faster healing goes hand lasts the shortest life, an example would be turtles or trees.

Some also try to find the means to eternal youth body, keep in mind that this is a claim pointless, because the human body is made by nature to live for a limited time, as this is the consequence logic suffering wear during their lifetime. Everything that begins has one day to finish all cell renewal process involves a certain degree of aging, the confusion is due to have a materialistic view of life I try to give the body the properties that are only own spirit, but they refuse, that is eternal life.



It would not be fair to say that everything that has characterized the great powers like Rome or the United States has been negative for humanity, because both have had great importance in the process of evolution. However it is common in them accommodate the belief that last forever, or think that power is something innate in them and not in others. It is precisely the abandonment of their own roots and judicious and honest attitude which in many cases has led them to their own destruction. So my purpose in doing this criticism is not to deny these facts, but rather encourage their progress by encouraging a change in attitude.


And the sea saw up a beast with ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads names of blasphemy. The beast I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion; and the dragon passed his power and his throne and great authority. And I saw one of his heads as if he had been killed; more she was healed of its mortal blow, and wonderful all the earth, and went after the beast. And they worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying: << Who is like the beast? And who can make war >> And was given a mouth speaking haughtiness and blasphemies; and it was given authority to do his work for forty two months. He opened his mouth for blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his dwelling and those who dwell in heaven. He was also allowed to make war with the saints and to overcome them; and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation. And they worship (the dragon) all the inhabitants of the earth whose names are not written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the slain lamb. If anyone has an ear, let him hear: If anyone is to go into captivity shall go into captivity; If anyone has to die by the sword will die by the sword this is the patience and faith of the saints. (Rev 13)

About two thousand years ago there was an empire, the Roman, who despite possessing some virtues had an economic model based on slavery and the brutal subjugation of the territories to which subjugated, though it would be false to say that Rome did not contribute anything positive the world, for his accomplishments were what made it great, but those mistakes were destroyed. Now the witness has been passed to the United States that somehow represents the resurgence of Rome and again is returning to repeat the mistake of basing its economy on a slaver albeit in a covert way approach, which could lead to medium-term their destruction, as happened with Rome. What he has done great in the United States have been its successes but it is a serious mistake to think that their power is something permanent and unchangeable and is a big mistake accommodate a triumphalist view of things. Really the vanguard of the way from Rome to the United States progress, but that does not mean that all values are true and believe such a thing would be a mistake, it would be a big mistake to expect the destruction of the United States because of the iniquities that has caused in the world, especially after the second world war, because it is a country that has contributed much to humanity and could still contribute much more, but it would be necessary to give a turn in its policy she posed mysticism and enslavement of immigrants as its economic foundation.

An example of the bias of the United States is continually extols evil and brutality of the Nazis during World War II and yet practice an attitude of condescension and abetting the extermination policy that the state of Israel has maintained with Palestinians for decades. Much more prudent and sensible would have been if since the emergence of the state of Israel had sought a policy of mutual respect between each other based on the recognition of the right to exist both Israel and an independent Palestinian state.


Great fallacy that is being left or right, as if truth could only have a political color perhaps one can be in favor of using only one hand and to exclude use of the other? When a person opts for such an attitude what you are doing is denying yourself the possibility of having an unbiased view of things and therefore play into the hands of the parties.


And I saw another beast beneath the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but spoke like a dragon. And the authority of the first beast exercised all before him. And he made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, which had been healed of its deathblow. He also worked great miracles, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in the sight of men. And I duped the inhabitants of the earth with the prodigies which was given him to do before the beast, saying to the people of the land should erect a statue to the beast who was hit by sword and revived. And he was awarded encourage the statue of the beast so that the statue of the beast should both speak and cause take the life of those who do not worship the statue of the beast. I did put everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, a printed mark on their right hand or the forehead, so that no one may buy or sell if it was not marked with the name of the beast or the number of his name. Here is wisdom: He who has understanding calculate the number of the beast. Because it is a figure of man: his number is six hundred threescore and six. (Rev 13:11)

Currently political parties also strive to make citizens and turn them into instruments of their interests, dupe them with their instigations and promote hatred against other parties for the sole purpose of nullifying their ability to reason and get thus a vow that what it does is turn citizens into accomplices of their iniquities, I keep them from doing anything until the next election.

Because when a citizen votes, what it does is give power to politicians who no longer have need for them at least for four years which is what usually last election cycles, and the power of voters remain sequestered throughout that time unable to do anything to change things. This kind of democracy will not be considered as such, since true democracy is one that consultation of citizens each and every one of the laws of a binding and not symbolically as now.

By this I do not mean that there is nothing positive in the current democratic models, but it is a serious mistake to think that the only possible or can not be improved, but it is possible that the process is more complex than it seems and requires stop participating in them as a form of protest if politicians refuse to change.


Therefore it is desirable that citizens demanded their political creation of a political model in which the power to decide every law fall exclusively on citizens and the political class only devoted to the drafting of such laws but not approval which could be periodically through means such as the Internet.

Of course things like the monarchy would not occur in this type of advanced society since this political system is itself a time when concepts such as equality or justice had no place in politics and therefore it is normal that disappear. In a truly democratic society can not exist political positions reserved for certain people compulsorily or legal impunity, because that contradicts itself with the principle of democracy.


In the background, the origin of the economic crisis of 2009 had its origin in a problem of competitiveness between the West and emerging economies, notably China.

Although in practice the origin of the crisis was a banking problem, that problem was only the consequence of this loss of competitiveness in developed countries versus those without.

True, in China and elsewhere an economic policy slave type is used by the extreme conditions to which their workers are subjected, but it is also true that in Western countries have adapted to an economic policy based on excessive subsidy that has been undermining the roots of the economy and competition from their companies.

Meanwhile unions warn away from this problem, they have only been concerned about making claims of an economic thinking that corporate funds are unlimited and forgetting that in the end are the same workers who pay claims with their work.

The policy of Western countries since the early twentieth century could be defined as bread and circuses, i.e. have been confined to favor many times protesters not according to their reasons, but the extent of the magnitude of the protest the only interest of getting the votes to stay in power, but increasingly undermining the stability of its economic system.

The crisis of 2009 what resulted was the need to create an economic policy that advantage quality and productivity on unjustified expenses and reward those who were more effective on those who do not.

For example it is a waste that college scholarships to promote careers that have no social demands are met. Why do you have to pay with public budgets the study of those races, even knowing that only a minimum of those students may be placed in what they have studied? It is clear that in this case are not populist measures and social measures that arise and at the end you have to pay the workers themselves but to their detriment. Therefore, in this case, it would be best to be financed by the state only those races where the supply of jobs by companies is greater than the demand from students.

Another error of economic policy is the tendency to expel the labor market to people increasingly early by early retirement, this policy is a torpedo at the waterline of business competitiveness, because everything pre-retired becomes dependent on budgets the state which in turn depends on companies. That does not mean that retirement is wrong, but rather that the economic system what to do is reward those who want to work on those who do not and therefore does not encourage workers to cease their work and redirect that activity in line with their age and circumstances. Is more effective and healthy a reduced lifetime that much hard work and tiring work for a few years.

Another weakness of the western economy is fraud casualties, it would be appropriate that any person of non-working low pass after a transitional period to be considered the same way as all the unemployed, i.e. to charge a minimum subsidy when you have no dependents and have them would act as appropriate.

In addition, these low employment purposes should not mean the loss of up to fifteen days of vacation or more vacation for less casualties who get caught. So it would favor workers were consistent with their own actions. This would not be a form of disregard for these people, it would have intended the system to adapt to the circumstances of each citizen without having to always resort to the inspectors.

The best favor that unions can do is encourage workers to work more on those who do not because besides contributing to the competitiveness of companies also get workers to see their efforts rewarded.

Excessive subsidies support of some Western economies leads to rewarding those who do not need money and punish those they need, that's an example of hypocrisy and populism.

Do not confuse subsidize social assistance, since social assistance should seek the integration of the needy in the economic system and return to society and the aid received. Instead excess subsidies is to give money to those who do not need just because populism to win votes but with a clear damage to the economy.

An example is given in some cases higher pensions for people with large fortunes and instead are withheld from their paychecks this capital to young couples with children during growth. That's not exactly a social policy, it is not logical that the economic situation of these couples is well off when paid inheritance and change will not be when needed, i.e. when their children are young and have to pay the mortgages on their floors. This type of policy is only intended to get the vote of retirees, but at the expense of the rest of society.

It is therefore logical that pensions are in line with the assets of each recipient and that pension is then a help for those who do not need more than a means to increase his fortune.

Another mistake of Western economic policy is continually interfere with the work rate sandwiching holidays in the middle of the week, that is a detriment to the effectiveness in the work process and does not favor businesses or workers. The right thing is that both working days and holidays are associated, i.e. days off should always start on Sunday back without ever mix holidays and labor, as long as they can avoid.

Another thing that should change is the subject of widowhood pensions should never receive a pension if the recipient does not have minor children or dependents and be of working age, the economic system should promote work on Idleness in the case of young people.

It is true that emerging economies should also change to fairer working conditions for their workers, even if it means them to be a little less competitive.

One way to alleviate the budget deficit may be to increase taxes, but it can be a double-edged sword and turn against the state by causing reduced consumption and therefore more unemployment. Ideally attack the problem at its root that is making the economic changes necessary to create jobs and make the economy more competitive, would also be positive distribute existing work together, because that instead of there being millions of idle unemployed and desperate would a society of full employment in which all participate in economic growth rather than relying on it.

Ultimately it could be said that the origin of the economic crisis in the West is in a subsidize policy that has been carried out in countries that have developed a false democratic models whose line of action has been characterized since the early twentieth century by a policy if anyone protest is given public money, if someone does strike is given public money, with the sole purpose of securing the vote, although those costs paid at the end of citizens. The state can not be subdued by wildcat strikes, you must establish rules of the game by law to ensure compliance with the essential services. An example of this are those countries that much to increase their health budgets the money ends up being invested in the salaries of doctors and not in treatment, not being able to establish laws governing justly the right to strike and avoid this blackmail and other groups.

But most paradoxical of the economic crisis is that while the trigger for it was bank speculation, however went to the leftist parties that more forced to rethink their ideas, because first of all I highlighted the unreal and ineffective some of its thesis that the crisis have had to scuttle, realizing that in the end only policies that favor competitiveness and moderate public spending are the key to exit the economic jam and regain the confidence of investors and consumers.



As for the unions, it would be good if these organizations operate more gradually pass as a law firms that form interleaved with acting today in companies. It would be desirable that tended to act more from the right and less from political ambition, namely that trade union activities would be differentiated form of the working day because they do not directly part of the job. It would also be positive for the good of all, unions collaborate in fighting the wildcat strikes that have little difference with terrorist activities, and that the strike days informational picketing were prohibited because too often passed information coercion.

We must also emphasize that unions have helped to encourage improvements in the working conditions in the West but have not been sufficiently aware that their often populist economic claims sometimes turned against the workers who claimed to defend. For example it would be good that unions collaborate with the state helping to create rules to combat unjustified lower than the end of the day end up hurting honest, measures workers such as reward constancy in work, keep in mind that these questions are not irrelevant since it competitiveness of enterprises and their ability to keep their jobs is derived.


It would be good companies sport the existence of a single type of employment contract that would be fixed and indefinite in time. Thus all workers from recruitment would leave in circumstances identical work and each month would accumulate severance corresponding dismissal would strengthening them increasingly in office, by hindering his dismissal, so we can make plans as have a family or other. It is therefore desirable to defend the existence of fair compensation that encourages companies to keep their workers but not so high as to prevent discard them in extreme cases, the temporary employment contract is something that has been abused and it would be correct to apply only to companies but not workers.

In return, companies should recognize their right to be able to dismiss employees without giving any explanation, but as long as they pay the appropriate compensation in each case, it is not good that the state imposes the presence of force employed by companies wishing not have, as it could undermine its internal stability and therefore its economic performance.

It is also important that governments recognize the right to private property, but not only with regard to companies, but also with respect to homeowners on their tenants. An owner must have the right recognized to have your home whenever you want after a reasonable period, and if the tenant has financial difficulties is not fair to expect to pay the consequences the owner, the right thing is to become part of a welfare program state.


One of the great betrayals of today's politicians towards their society is the condescension toward criminals given in these false democracies. While criminals are considered as citizens with rights, victims are treated with contempt and neglect by the law. This can not blame the judges, because they fulfill the orders given by politicians and it is they who have to hold them accountable. All you have a poor citizen is his family and poverty and does not expect politicians fail to get rich, but expects at least protect them from criminals. Therefore one of the greatest crimes of the policy implemented in some is to put a ridiculous cap on the number of years to serve in prison, countries and in some cases serial murderers released are after serving a fraction of their sentences and all for complicity and cowardice of politicians that the only thing they think about is the costs involved in having offenders in prison. These politicians forget that when a citizen takes a life intentionally, it is logical to lose the right to decide on yours and therefore it is right that page with his work in prison for damage caused to their victims or the state and still work in prisons a requirement that it should be mandatory for all prisoners except themselves their expenses and compensation due to victims were paid.

Therefore, it is logical that when a criminal will correspond by the accumulation of their sentences to life imprisonment, this is fulfilled unhindered, and the state does not have to have any fear to require offenders to work in prisons that expenses for their own expenses.

It should be borne in mind that when a person commits one or more crimes intentionally, once the criminal is arrested and convicted, things like rehabilitation or interest of the offender must pass to have a secondary value, because who takes a life knowing must stop to decide on his own, and the state and victims who must decide how to manage this life so that more serve the public interest to prevent crimes, and if for it is considered that should remain in the life imprisonment is their right to decide.

No law is better that you release the murderers easily than one that runs them, the aim of the law should be justice and not fulfill the desires of criminals.

I would also like to stress that I do not consider the death penalty as a necessary solution when the economic mechanisms of a society are going well or there are no problems of force majeure could be a war.

But also there that say that when a prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment show his desire to die voluntarily and could be shown that there has been no coercion in this state would also no reason to stop them, in which case he could offer means for this to happen seamlessly and painlessly.

It should be borne in mind that a society that claims can not leave loose ends on these issues and the message that the state has to transmit to citizens is that crimes must be punished especially violations or serial killings. Of course all prisoners would benefit from the policies of sentence reduction for good behavior or other causes, but these benefits could not be a greater reduction than twenty percent of the total sentence, so those prisoners as serial murderers convicted at high penalties they could not back out of the prison, which is logical if you want to do justice to their victims.

As for prison leave, this is another example of estrangement between politicians and society, because only must give these permits prisoners who are about to serve their sentences, since there is workers returning to their homes on weekends, is criminals who are in jail because they are unable to be released.

It is also important to make clear that one should not confuse the law with justice, because the first is the set of mandatory rules created by the state and the second is the truth that emanates from nature and which should be into account the rights and freedoms of everyone impartially. In principle, the law should be based on justice when creating your rules, but this need not necessarily be so.

Another example of the apathy towards the victims of some states in these false democracies is the condescension with crimes committed by minors. It is true that a child does not have the same ability to approach an adult, but that's no reason to apply ridiculous sentences in proportion to the offenses caused, because the message that society is transmitted is that if you're under can violate or you can kill that go unpunished. Nor is it logical that a man of eighteen serve a sentence as an adult and another seventeen and a half years fulfills another much smaller, the sentence must be in proportion to how close this most old but there is a separation between abrupt be or not.


Some states that proclaim themselves as democracies, tend to practice on issues of legality an inverted policy in which victims are treated as criminals and criminals as victims, for example in Spain, after the end of the dictatorship, he began the so-called democratic and those called "Democratic politicians" transition also came a change in prison policy that serious crimes such as rape and murder became treated as minor, and minor offenses such as shoplifting, although repetitive happened to have treatment in practice legalized. This means that the victims were preparing an cover trial with all legal gestures, the thief was condemned with all the sonority of the judgment, and once finished the trial was let go and the fine was withdrawn based on Frivolous loopholes claiming insolvency, as if the goal of the law was to obtain money and not justice. Such a state can not be considered only as an accomplice and from a legal point should be considered vicariously liable if it protects the offender refuses to punish such politics that actually hides the desire of the state they are citizens by theft who keep beggars or criminals rather than assuming their duties and create a genuine social policy to end marginalization. Of all the actions of these false democrats vilest far it has been to look away to insecurity and meanwhile spend fortunes in armored cars and bodyguards for them.

In the background, giving the impression that the process of condescension with criminals by these false political Democrats, which actually seeking to create a penal code to suit them, meaning that if convicted for corruption legal measures have already prepared to go unpunished and with them the rest of the criminals.

It should be borne in mind that in Spain and other countries prison sentences for theft never go out of an independently reduced the value of the stolen period of time, even without having been returned under these circumstances many people find it tempting idea of stealing even knowing that they will be arrested.

We must also recognize that the Franco dictatorship was a brutal regime that restricted freedoms, but go from that to a libertine political system also is better, especially shows that extremism often not a solution and make it clear that what they want these politicians is not to benefit citizens but simply create a policy of mere democratic appearance with which get votes.


This phase of history characterized by the hegemony of the victors of the Second World War should be replaced by one in which all countries had equal representation at the headquarters of the United Nations.

After the war the victorious countries were more concerned with securing their power in the world that actually guarantee a future of peace and prosperity for all, so the nascent United Nations UN began from the beginning take, as far be a democratic body laid the foundations of privilege for the great powers to establish the right of veto in what they pleased no. This right only they had some and others were denied. Who would question the arguments of the great powers? Surely in a world destroyed after the war it was easy to establish unjust statutes knowingly United States stated that out in its territory where the headquarters establishment claiming to be an environment of democracy and stability, but it is not prudent to host this organization remain continuously in the same place, then you run the risk of favoritism are given, and it would not be fair to remain in a country like the United States after the end of world war II all he has done has been dispute with the Soviet Union over the world, often questionable manner as with the support of the Chilean dictatorship or unwarranted invasion of Iraq, for which a lot of untruths were used and only resulted in one hand United States got to import oil from that country as initially wanted, but on the other to leave the war there a million dead civilians and a shattered country.

Another amazing thing is the claim of the victors in World War have exclusivity in the use of nuclear weapons is it only these countries have the right to possess such weapons as if it were a divine plan?

It is logical that countries like Germany or its allies may have restricted this right temporarily to be the cause of conflict, but that does not mean that the winners have exclusivity in this area.

The new organization of the United Nations should be first and foremost a democratic organization in which the vote was fair and no veto for anyone, plus it would be logical that the seat be rotating among all races and continents to avoid favoritism as now.


Eventually, all nations and races of the earth were to have the same assets and the same per capita than most advanced countries income, but this requires that the egotism of their representatives as developed countries toiling by fleecing their natural resources ends. It is also necessary to underline the importance it will implement a policy of birth control as a way to prevent all the economic growth is spent on keeping millions more poor, this was done in China with positive results regarding economic growth although it could be improved in some aspects, the key to sustainable economic development by which a country only has the number of people who can feed. This would be coupled with a process of recycling raw materials and an effort by technological and social progress.


It would be desirable to facilitate world peace, that small disagreements among nations caused by territorial disputes find a solution, here I raise options for some cases.

The best way that a situation of dispute over territory between different states is resolved without any of the two parties would be considered impaired in turn pass those territories into independent states in practice.

This would be perfectly applicable in places such as Ceuta and Melilla, Gibraltar, the Falkland Islands or Northern Ireland, i.e. these territories that sometimes do not want to be part of those states that are closer to them and claim them as their own, so they would do is stop relying on any state, but would be able to join their natural neighbors in the event that that desire be expressed in a majority of all citizens. So exist as independent states would no longer exist territorial conflict between the two states that claim and only they would decide their future freely.


Much vanity are some of the currently existing nationalisms as those present in Spain. For example, the Spanish nationalism bases its operation on fostering hatred Spain as an engine of development, which is paradoxical if we consider that it is in Spain where the rights of the provinces and autonomous regions are more developed around the globe.

It is surprising that in a world where the media come together more and more people nationalisms endeavor to separate them, and not all nationalist movements have to be objectionable, but many of them arising from the promotion of a disparaging view of others as with the Basque, which proposes the creation of an independent state tiny and encourages the existence of a language for use by a handful of people, when used the Castilian could be understood with five hundred million all the world. It is also pathetic defense that make the Catalan separatists regarding their language because they claim to be a differentiator itself and the rest of Spain. These people forget that their language is not as own as they think and that really is nothing more than a derivative of Latin that was imposed by the Romans two thousand years ago, i.e. that exacerbated defense to seek any point of disunity with the Spanish state such as language, only shows that the nationalist parties what they are doing is to use regional languages as a weapon and a tool to foment hatred and separation from Spain and thus increase the power of their parties instead of trying to find connecting elements with it, but history has shown many times that is with the union as the force is achieved and not the creation of tiny states as claimed by the nationalists in Spain.

Not forget that one of the factors that led to the civil war were precisely the separatist claims of autonomies, playing to suggest that all the ills of the economy or society were the fault of Spain and all goods were the responsibility of their autonomies.

It is true, moreover, that the last word must have the citizens of each region on their political future, but when the nationalist parties what they do is hijack the public opinion creating an image of hatred Spain is difficult to consider that opinion may considered as objective and unbiased.

It should be borne in mind that in Spain these political parties have a mechanically similar operation that had the Nazis in Germany and who base their policies and growth expectations in the criminalization and hatred of Spain as a form of expansion and therefore their approaches are very implausible.

In addition after the transition to democracy the Spanish state created one of the most decentralized political models of the moment to satisfy such movements and promote cohesion, but was not taken into account that excessive des centralism also favors disunity. For example, a big political mistake was creating a government of proportional representation since the end of the elections the government is unable to govern and must pilgrimage to certain autonomies to get enough power, which means giving in to the blackmail of those autonomies with the consequent disdain for others. This would not have happened if the vote to form a government were to runoff should not have an absolute majority, and always the winning party could form a government with at least fifty-one percent of the seats. That desire to encourage the separatists to end has resulted in an increasingly fractured, uneven and ungovernable state, which is unfortunate considering that Spain in the background is one of the most developed countries of the world, so that in Spain and behind each election the price of political stability through the extent to which the major political parties are prepared by decomposing the state in favor of autonomy, a country that boasts and want to be taken into account can not afford to give that image of weakness and governability to the world.

Ideally eventually create a single language, but not just for one country but for everyone, thus the benefits would be incalculable for all to be possible to travel without the difficulties of understanding or translation of other languages.

Nationalism only are useful when there are compelling reasons that justify such as the creation of the state of Ireland since in this case there are both historical reasons and geographical that suggest the feasibility of an independent state since being physically separated from the mainland and have a higher dimensions has all the necessary to survive safely and indefinitely circumstances.



From my point of view the universe has a cyclical nature, this means that everything in the cosmos renews everything regenerates and everything is exchanged. Galaxies finish their period of expansion and return to the starting point again and again to create another universe in a permanent process of creating universes. But the immortal spirits of living beings reincarnate again and again living in each cosmic cycle a different life until the same time start again and then re-live the same events, but each being would live the experiences of others in an infinite process of replacement and renewal so that all beings would live all possible experiences in the cosmos. So what sense does it always unfair conduct and when the passage of time and cosmic cycles all live all experiences? It makes no sense cause harm to others, because sooner or later we will live ourselves.



Some might think that the philosophy of justice not for him not to believe in the cyclical nature of the universe. However deeply wrong, because the reasons for justice as an essential philosophical principle no need to look for on principles which some people might consider as distant or Utopian as it would in the case of cyclicality, as these reasons are mainly derived from concept of self-defense, i.e. it is not possible to create a society organized in large cities without regard to respect for the rights of others as a basic standard of conduct. Those who do not respected would be punished by using self-defense, i.e. up to 85% of acts of justice would be expressed by self-defense, and only 15% could be considered a consequence of the belief in the character cyclic universe. It is clear that is self-defense mainly it necessary to have the philosophy of justice as an essential philosophical standard without being necessary to resort to other ideas, which does not mean that the cyclical nature of the universe or full justice can not make sense. Some might believe in a kind of philosophy of justice and not the other, this would be called justice with exceptions, as would be to have justice as the core of philosophical ideas, but do not believe in the cyclical nature of the universe follow a philosophical approach based on full justice. Or believe in the cyclical nature not deem necessary or proper follow an attitude of complete justice, and only believed in justice with exceptions that could also be called justice derived from police self-defense. In any case, you need to have justice as an essential philosophical norm, both for each person individually as any advanced society, it is impossible coexistence and progress without this clear.

Therefore, it is clear that to have justice as an essential philosophical basis is necessary, but not because of a romantic philosophical point of view or belief in the cyclical nature of the universe, since it is the contact on a daily basis between people making it necessary, because it is through self-defense as shown in most cases expressions of justice and not a distant through cyclical way, as this represents only a minimum of assumptions.


People who base their way of being in the pettiness and despotism end up being unhappy because that way of being what it does is brutalizing the soul by reducing their sensitivity and thus their ability to assess things around them and a lot of money They get never get to feel satisfied or performed.

Actually an evolved society seeks happiness through the wonders that science and technology have given humanity and not despotic or violent behavior, is also useful as a means of personal fulfillment.


Some people may believe in justice as essential philosophical rule, but it can also be raised with exceptions, not to believe in the cyclical nature of the universe. Also some people may believe in the cyclical nature of the universe, but think that this does not lead to consider a full justice, considering that are not linkable immediate events with distant through the cyclical nature, at least as it concerned a moral attitude. These people believe that while it is true cyclicality, defend full justice would be wrong and would bring more disadvantages than advantages. In this case it would mean rejecting the philosophy of justice as an essential rule, but who think like are the exceptions arise. In any event, any evolved society needs to have clear these principles to be considered as such. It is clear therefore that uphold justice as an essential philosophical rule solely based on the cyclical nature of the cosmos would be wrong, because it is through self-defense as primarily expressed. You can not believe the total derivative justice cyclicality, but anyone who thinks that this can lead a life based on iniquity be wrong, because through self-defense would find punishment for antisocial attitude. Only principles based primarily on justice can make a person or a society to progress. That said, I would like to clarify that from my point of view the best option is to defend the full justice as a mode of civic conduct, because it is the one that makes more fully the person and the other comments seek only to understand the different approaches on this topic they may arise. In any case all opinions should always be respected and when they arise in a peaceful manner.

The fact that the future society could come to believe that the defense of fair behavior without exceptions could not be more appropriate, does not mean therefore that society no longer needs a value scale that considers justice as a basic rule, It continues to exist as self-defense as the main driver of justice, so justice as a basic standard of moral conduct would always be needed whether it is complete or not.

So the key is to reject despotic and selfish behavior as part of our being, as these behaviors are derived from considering evil as representative and essential character element and those acting are thus destined to be unhappy and feel always unsatisfied. This is because personality inverted to adopt a model of moral behavior that best they could ensure a happy and balanced life, as this is derived from living in harmony and harmony with other people.

As for the question of what would consist exceptions justice, essentially it would be exceptional and minority situations in which there would be no physical confrontation usually, as in the case of business benefits, salaries of politicians or those derived from the expansion of states throughout history, i.e. would be mainly indirect forms of injustice and a certain degree of social acceptance. It should be borne in mind that if an employer has a profit motive, it is preferable to leave to have a higher salary than allow to give rise to corruption, the damage that would mean businesses. Having a modest salary, must be on its own initiative and without coercion, this does not mean that these jobs salaries should be unlimited, but to pretend that wages are equal in all trades and positions is a utopian assumptions and that even possible you have to have the will of each citizen without pressure.


The reason that philosophy is the most difficult science is based on the fact that the philosopher is the distance which increases the depth of its findings. It is the concentration which increases the results of the philosopher and this concentration is not possible to get without detachment and intimacy.

In a society in which social relationships and work are necessary for life, philosophical research arduous and difficult so this is the science that has lagged behind the end. It is therefore curious, from my point of view, that in this current confused society, philosophy is the least evolved there and yet the music more.

Paradoxically which normally guarantees life that are social relationships and have children, but do not help in investigating philosophical, because this science requires a certain distance and the greater the depth of the larger conclusions is the distance and concentration.

Arguably the evolutionary scale, the first and simplest is discovered, it is everything related to the physical sciences because those sciences can be developed in a professional manner without interfering with the normal rhythms and ways of life. But the philosophy is different, although there has been much further behind because of the difficulty of reconciling philosophy, family and work. It should be borne in mind that the degree of depth on the findings of a philosopher is in direct proportion to their degree of concentration and detachment. It is therefore normal that the most important in the development of this science part is pending for the end, this does not mean that therefore a philosopher can not have children or social life but it is clear that the degree of progress is directly related to the degree you can get some privacy.

It could be said that philosophy is the art of finding the pleasure of silence through meditation, because meditation constructive as a means of research and progress can be great entertainment, and the main tool of the philosopher is apart from the books their own brain and reasoning ability.


Some think that the origin of criminals and despotic some people's behavior can be found in an exclusively genetic, but this view is in my fleeting opinion, it leaves education and philosophical and moral ideas as if they had sense or were unnecessary. I think this is a big mistake, since it is folly to think that a developed society can survive without giving its citizens a formation in values since childhood, highlighting the need for civic behavior as a fundamental element in the order of values all evolved society. Not to forget that a healthy child who is not a moral formation, runs a clear risk of straying into evil. Therefore, the genetic component in this case is rather a secondary value and acts primarily resulting in the sufferer more difficult to distinguish between what you can do without reprisals and what not, but always being aware of damage and act against the rights of others, genetic problems can cause those who suffer a gross view of things and mental obfuscation, but values education from childhood what could alleviate effectively.


And war was in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels prevailed not over, and no longer found his place in heaven. And it precipitated the great dragon that old serpent, called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the universe. He was thrown to the ground, and with him his angels were thrown. And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, Now has come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ, because it was the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night. They overcame him under the blood of the Lamb and by the word, which testified, despising their lives to death. Therefore rejoice o heavens, and ye that dwell in them. But woe to the earth and the sea! because the Devil went down to you, filled with great wrath, knowing that his time is short. (Rev 12:7)

The struggle of humanity against evil is not unique to our planet, it is a common phenomenon in all the worlds of the universe in its early stages of evolution. Eventually false beliefs, unjustified prejudices and despotic behavior will also be expelled from this world and the earth will reach a level of stability that will allow you to expand through space in an environment of peace and clarity of ideas inspired by scientific knowledge.

Because evil actually lives in ignorance, and those worlds that support life on truth and science leave no room for tyranny and despotism, therefore, this is only possible on worlds like earth, they have not completed their stage of evolution.

Therefore, I believe that evil on earth has little time left, if we consider it as a consequence of the ignorance of some people who do not understand that life based on ethical behavior and balanced is the key to happiness.



And he showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In their place, and on both sides of the river, the tree of life that gives twelve crops, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the trees used for healing of the nations. There will be no curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and his servants will serve him and see his face: and his name will be on their foreheads. And there will be no more night; nor they need lamplight or sunlight, because the Lord God will look upon them, and shall reign forever and ever. (Rev 22)

Is a great truth that the Bible should not be taken at face value and those that do fall into an act of great ingenuity, for the Bible and all the books written can be mistakenly misinterpreted or deliberately modified. Justice is not to follow strictly all laying on a book much to believe in its author, faith does not have to be in contradiction with reason and man of the future will be characterized by not accepting anything because if, but only after an objective and impartial analysis free topical or taboos.

Some also thought to be of divine origin Bible God would not allow its content be modified, but how do they know that is not what God intended this to happen in order to awaken our intelligence and critical? Only a fool would be able based on religious grounds to give up their ability of criticism and reasoning.

That said we must also say that in my opinion, the Bible is one of the most positive books that have been created in the history of humanity, for his great humanism, for his commitment to human being, and promote coexistence between people. I think this book is a legacy of superior to the inhabitants of this planet as a small favor that make us on the path of evolution beings.

I would also like to stress that when I proposed the creation of this book, which seek to provoke in Western society a reaction to this paralysis that afflicts at the present time and give new impetus to the development of philosophy as happened in ancient times in the wake of the Greek culture.

What defines this present time back to the Second World War, it is simply folding the pattern marked by the major powers and economic interests of companies being considered humanistic values in second place. Why prejudices have become the norm and what is considered true is false and what is considered false is true, politicians only strive to get rich in the short time remaining in politics and try not do anything that gives rise to talk about them and reduce their income, do not care to see their society falls into a premature aging because of feminism and civilization is absorbed by immigration because only value the god of money and profit the companies.

You need someone to tell the truth that no one dares to say so reborn a new society that considers man and humanistic values as your goal and not the mere enrichment companies with cheap labor.

With the creation of this book I hope to get that readers have finally a cultural reference guide them and guidance in the present confusing and wrong time, maybe some people think that my books are small or simple, but it's not the size of a book that counts but the value of its contents.


And he said to me. "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near The unrighteous continue in their wickedness and dirty let him be filthy more, just may work more justice, and the holy let him be holy Behold come quickly, and my reward is with me to reward each according to his work. I am the alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

Blessed are those who wash their robes have right to the tree of life and enter the city gates. Out with the dogs, sorcerers, fornicators, murderers, idolaters, and whoever loves and makes a lie! I Jesus sent my angel to testify unto you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come." Who also hears say, "Come" And who is thirsty come; and whoever wants to take free water of life.

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues written in this book; and if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and the holy city, which are described in this book. Which bears witness to this says, "Yes, I come quickly." So be it: Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints Amen. (Rev. 22:10)


Nov. 12, 2018, 7:05 p.m. 0 Report Embed 0
The End

Meet the author

Antonio Pinto Renedo Mi mayor ilusión es descubrir aquello que los libros no cuentan.

Comment something

No comments yet. Be the first to say something!