Name Change

So I was thinking about suing Laura Ingraham for taking the name of my site for her show. So I decided to do a search to see when she adopted the name “The Ingraham Angle” for her show.

Well, I found out much to my chagrin that there is another blog named “The Langley Angle”  that apparently has been around since 2013 or so. So I went ahead and changed the name of my blog just to avoid any unpleasantness.


Empirical Ignorance: A Verdict Without the Evidence

Just recently, one of those snake handling evangelicals was bitten by a snake yet again. This time however, he died from the venom. The story has been repeatedly mentioned and I can’t help but believe that those broadcasting it are just grinning like pigs in shista. Here is just more evidence of how whacked out those Christians are, they say, and just one more reason to marginalize an entire religious group.

That got me to thinking. I’ve been dealing, and I’m sure you have too, with certain people whose favorite tactic is to mock and belittle Christians as uneducated bumpkins who eschew science and instead believe the universe is ruled by some magical sky daddy who hates everyone but those who believe in him. They believe people of faith have no interest in the laws of physics etc, and are actually opposed to any scientific explanation and attribute everything in the universe to some sort of spiritual magic. They go as far as to accuse believers of being incapable of higher thought.

These same people evoke science and the scientific method to justify their belief in a universe where there is no moral code, no right or wrong and no intelligent design. God is a ridiculous concept to them. They have no trouble believing in some magical box where a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time however. Schrodinger’s cat

When “debating” with Christians they demand the evidence for the existence of  God. They claim to come with an open mind and desire only to know the truth. The fatal flaw in their approach though is that that make assumptions from the very beginning that go completely against the scientific method. They assume anyone who believes in God completely rejects science while ignoring any evidence to the contrary. The make up their minds that their own bigotry and prejudices are true based on their own inability and unwillingness to understand the concept of intelligent design. Their scientific inquiry into belief in God is over before it begins. Faith in God can only be understood on a personal level and for the scientific method to be observed the “researcher” must sincerely attempt to experience faith in God themselves. Demanding evidence without doing the research necessary is intellectually lazy and frankly, not scientific at all.

Granted, there are people like the above mentioned snake handler that seem to give people of faith a bad name. These people however are in no way representative of people of faith in general and Christians in particular. Just a wee bit of research would make this abundantly clear.

As a believer in God, I believe in the study of the universe. To understand how the universe works does not negate the existence of a Creator. That’s on a par with believing there is no creator of the automobile because we understand how the automobile works.  I believed the big bang happened. I also believed God was the one who said “BANG!” Apparently, science may have gotten that one wrong though. Now some are saying the big bang never happened. 

Always open to new understanding, I reread Genesis. Turns out, I was wrong to believe in the big bang too. Genesis clearly states that the universe already existed but was without form at the time He decided to create man. So in a curious way, the bible led me to science and science led me back to the bible.

It is the height of ignorance to have an either or approach to God or to science. To do so is to close one’s self off to all the information one needs to truly understand life, the universe and everything. It is the height of arrogance to ridicule and mock those who believe differently than you do while you lack the knowledge to even enter the debate on equal footing due to your own lack of knowledge and the willingness to acquire that knowledge.

When Did We Forget How to Say No?

Reading the news these past few years, I’m constantly amazed at what small special interests groups have been able to accomplish by demanding their rights. At the same time I’m amazed how willingly the rest of us have given up our rights or at least allowed those rights to be compromised.

When were the special interest groups able to convince us that their rights trump our rights? When did it become appropriate for one small group to tell the majority that the majority’s religion was no longer welcome in the public square simply because the smaller group, the minority by the way, is “offended” by that religion? They’re not offended by the majority religion in any logical way. They just don’t like it. They don’t like being told what to do and the very existance of an institution devoted to traditional moral values is more than they can stand. They ascribe all the world’s evils to certain religions while ironically giving a pass to others with a much worse record on human rights. 

It’s not just religion that they are offended by though. They seem to take offense at anyone or any institution that dares to contrast their beliefs and behaviors with deeply held traditional beliefs and behaviors. If we say we are against killing unborn children they attack us as bigoted and hateful, to cite just one example. There are far too many examples of these attacks. The attacks are followed by strong-arm tactics designed to silence us.

They remind me of children and like children they throw tantrums until they either get thier way or learn that their tantrums won’t get them anywhere. the second outcome requires adults who are willing to say no. we as a society have forgotten how to say no.

It’s time we started saying no to these people who want to erode our rights to the point of uselessness while at the same time demanding that we look the other way while they do whatever they want to. They are not content to live and let live. They cannot live side by side with us and our differing beliefs. They want to eliminate any thought, belief or action that they decide arbitrarily that they don’t like. It’s not much of a stretch to believe the next step could be the elimination of people they don’t like. think about it.

If we don’t start saying no to these people and preserve and exercise our rights we will lose them. We set a terrible precedent up to this point but it’s not too late. It’s time to end this madness.


I’ve changed the name of the site as well as the focus. I have plans to begin doing serious articles including interviews and so on. I will continue writing opinion pieces but in the past I wrote them off the top of my head. No longer. I will research and write more thought out and comprehensive pieces. I hope to have an article sometime this week.

Sons of Anarchy: Rethinking the Races


!!!Spoiler Alert if you haven’t watched Sons of Anarchy!!!

Alright. So, I’m into season 4 of Sons of Anarchy and things between the Mexicans and the Sons are peaceful again, so to speak. The Sons and the Mayans (the local MC that has been a thorn in the side of the Sons over the years) have made peace and are working with a Mexican drug cartel that Alvarez ( The Mayan president) has introduced them to.

It seems like the Sons and the Mayans are getting along and will continue to do so in the future. But wait just a damned minute! The Cartel, fronted by Romeo (Danny Trejo), deals with some pretty rough people and soon the Mexican cartels are engaged in a bloody back and forth that has the Sons wondering what the hell they were thinking.

There’s also a black sheriff that has taken over Charming, the Sons home turf, and he has a few racial chips on his shoulder. He begins the play the one secretly bi-racial Sons member for information on the Sons or he’ll expose him. The Sons apparently have a rule against black members. That seems odd though because one of their closest allies is the Grim Bastards, an all-black MC. There has been no violence between the Sons and the Bastards at all.

Anyway, now the Sons are being portrayed as the victims as it were. The Mayans are being portrayed with a ho-hum attitude toward the cartel’s violence, The black sheriff is portrayed as torn as he allows himself to be caught between the white man’s world and the world of “his people”.

Juice, the member who is bi-racial, part black and part white, is in a no man’s land, having been betrayed by his “brother” and believing his brothers in the Sons will expel him if they knew his secret.

(A note on bi-racial folks. I don’t trust them if they only identify with one part of their heritage, Ala Barack Obama, Tiger Woods, etc.)

So it seems race is a central theme to Sons of Anarchy. It’s curious that the mind of a liberal, so tolerant, so enlightened, would produce something so potentially divisive.  The show is supposed to be based on Hamlet, and I can see Hamlet in it, but I wonder if there’s another message saturating the show.

Faith in God: A Survival Mechnism


Many people these days are either wrapped up in religion of some sort or fighting tooth and nail to keep from being hemmed in by any kind of belief system. Atheists, spiritualists think they are eschewing traditional beliefs but they are sometimes more controlled by ancient beliefs than your garden variety Christian or Muslim.

They think by divesting themselves of any shred of tradition they are blazing a trail into new and undiscovered territory but their road leads back to the time when the gods walked the Earth and most people worshiped one idol or another.

Competing with the gods back in those days was Yahweh and Ahura Mazda. Ahura Mazda is the Zoroastrian God and some, including myself believe that He is also Yahweh, the Jewish and Christian God.

Many chose to worship the gods of Greece and Rome because adherence was simple and easy. Burn some incense, make a sacrifice here and there and pretty much do whatever you wanted to the rest of the time.

Yahweh and Mazda were different. They asked the believer to live a life of introspection and service in order to better themselves and become more acceptable to be in the presence of their Lord.

I’m not going into the tenets of Zoroastrianism today but just wanted to put it out there as something to think about.

As I said, Yahweh asks more of His worshipers. Faith and obedience to Him isn’t enough. Faith in oneself is crucial as well. Think about it. Yahweh asks that you better yourself so you can join Him someday once this life is over for you.

He wants you to choose to embark on the journey. He will not force you. You must believe that you can do it. You have to believe that you are good enough to reach Heaven. That sounds quite opposite of what you’ll hear coming from most pulpits in America and I suppose, the rest of the world.

Preachers will tell you you are lower than a worm because you cannot be good enough on your own to go before God. In one sense this is true. But in the broadest sense it is not.

In one sense none of us is God, so therefore we are subordinate to Him. No one is good enough, meaning “has permission”, to barge into the President’s office whenever we feel like it. There are protocols. You must get permission first.

Faith in God, real faith, is your permission slip. Once attained, it will never be rescinded. God has a few rules however. Just as the President will want you to wipe your feet, keep your shoes off the furniture and so on, God expects a certain behavior when you enter his presence.

Here’s where the situations differ. The President will rarely make an exception to the rules based on how your day is going. God will.

See, God’s rules aren’t protocol. He won’t get upset if you break the rules if you have a good reason. He doesn’t have an ego to bruise. The President does. Like most of us, he sees the skirting of his rules as an affront to him.

King David ate the holy bread right out of the ark when he and his men were on the run and hungry, breaking a major religious rule. KJV Mark 2:25-26

God wasn’t upset. His people are more important than the rules. David was constantly striving to please God and failing miserably a lot of the time. God knew David was a spiritual clod. He knew David would break many more rules in the future. He also knew what David would become because David would never forsake his faith in God.

I say all that to say this: The rules in the bible are there as a guide. They are there to help us along but not to constrain us. Take the dietary rules in Leviticus. No doctor can dispute that they are extremely valuable for a people who live off the land and have limited resources and knowledge medically.

They were told not to eat skin fish, which we now know can contain harmful levels of mercury. They were told not to eat pork. We have known for some time that eating poorly stored and cooked pork can be deadly.

What I am getting at is many have put forth an image of God that is not accurate at all. Many well meaning people as well as religious illiterates and charlatans, not understanding God themselves, have constructed and image of God that is not biblically or spiritually accurate.

God doesn’t say to not do something “because I said so!” He advises us not to do certain things so we don’t harm ourselves or others. The choice is ours though. We have to deal with the repercussions if we don’t heed His advice.

So when people say “Why does God let bad things happen to good people” the above is usually the answer. Not always, because life is cruel sometimes and bad things happen because they happen.

God gives us free will and with it comes collateral damage sometimes. That doesn’t bother me though when bad things happen to me. Life’s a bitch. Shit happens. I keep moving forward and don’t blame God. He wants me to survive this world and He’ll always be there to help me when it counts. The more I heed His advice however, the less I’ll need Him to rescue me.

Think about it.