Skip to content

Expose the Filipino Freethinkers as Enemies of Reason, Science, and Freedom!

March 29, 2010

To all truly rational individuals (whether theists or atheists):

You who love ideas and who firmly believe that they matter to your life and to the achievement of your values and goals- you who seek the truth and who regard your life as worthy of the right, proper and moral idea, do not waste a speck of your time dealing with a herd of nihilists and relativists who reject and resent philosophy and basic moral principles and who distort and misrepresent the real essence of reason, science, and freedom. For those who woefully declare that “nothing is absolute” and “existence does not exist” do not belong to our modern civilization, which is a product of man’s use of reason. Run away from a herd of neo-mystics who preach that man is the means to the ends of others- that you are merely a sacrificial animal to be immolated for what they call the “common good.” Do not think that by dealing with these neo-mystics (Free-farters) you might gain some knowledge, idea, or experience. Alas, you gain nothing from dealing with or appeasing an evil, immoral collective that has no specific set of values and no sense of purpose, and that is only motivated by hate, utter ignorance and dogmatic relativism.




There’s a neo-mystic group in the Philippines that is out to spread a culture of hate, anti-reason, anti-capitalism, anti-freedom, and anti-man. It must be exposed before it invades the consciousness of the youth. Like Adolf Hitler said: “He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.” Indeed, the main targets of this evil collective are the young Filipinos… It must be EXPOSED!

Why is this euphemistically named Filipino Freethinkers’ collective an enemy of reason?

These worshipers of New Atheism (Filipino Freethinkers) are not advocates of reason, logic and freedom, but of welfare-statism and collectivism. Their concerted, strong and seemingly immutable advocacy of the RH bill reveals the disturbing psycho-epistemology of the Free-farters: that they promote anti-capitalism, collectivism, welfare-statism, things that would all lead to dictatorship. But yes, the Free-farters are deceptively hiding behind the guise of reason, and that their group— a mélange of various collectivist “isms” tossed into a single anti-concept: Freethinkers (which has no objective, specific meaning at all)—is simply a socialist/communist caucus masquerading as an ardent defender of freedom and man’s rights.

What is their definition/concept of reason?

Actually there’s none except the fact that it holds science and logic as its bumper sticker. This groundless, outré Free-farters’ movement in the Philippines simply flaunts the tagline—the “fellowship of so-called freethinking Filipinos, composed of atheists, agnostics, deists, humanists, and liberal theists.”

To justify its existence this neo-mystic collective adopted the word “freethought” as its guiding spirit or philosophy. If “freethought” is what they call philosophical perspective, freethinking is its process or tool, which the Free-farters should and ought to apply in order to be a rational human being. And they have also embraced the Wikipedia definition of “freethought” which is as follows:

“Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds that opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or any other dogma. The cognitive application of freethought is known as freethinking, and practitioners of freethought are known as freethinkers.” (copied verbatim)

What’s the deceptive scheme of the Filipino Freethinkers?

The Filipino Freethinkers’ lexicographic scheme would have been justified had they offered a specific, objective and non-arbitrary meaning of “freethought” as a philosophy and of “freethinking” as its tool. Anyone who clearly understands the true concept of reason could easily root out the fatal flaw of this so-called philosophical term (freethought). If it is indeed a “philosophical viewpoint,” as what the creator of this Wikipedia definition claims, what then is its metaphysical and epistemological base? How does this philosophical perspective explain the principles of reality and the universe as a whole? How many truths does it hold? What is its theory of knowledge— how do we know we know and how is knowledge acquired?

Since no one in this collective is able to explain these concepts, it is then safe to assume that Freethinking or freethought are merely a newspeak designed to pull another sick joke on the unthinking, skeptic mankind. They say action speaks louder than words. Anyone who took a fleeting tour of the group’s website would be able to draw a conclusion that the Free-farters are engaged not in the promotion of reason, science and freedom, but in a new kind of religious battle against the religionists.

What is the true concept of reason?

Reason is not an end in itself; it’s a noun not an adjective; it’s a process not a bumper sticker. Reason, from the Aristotelian  and Objectivist point of view, is a faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by one’s senses. Reason does not simply mean science. In essence, reason is a process, which every scientist or inventor must possess in order to produce a productive idea or any object with commercial value. Epistemologically, reason tells you that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Objectively speaking, it is this faculty that integrates man’s perceptions by means of forming abstractions or conceptions, thus raising man’s knowledge from the perceptual level, which he shares with animals, to the conceptual level, which he alone can reach. The method which reason employs in this process is logic—and logic is the art of non-contradictory identification.

Metaphysically, a rational human being believes that existence exists. This is because reason is man’s only means of grasping reality and of acquiring knowledge—and, therefore, the rejection of reason means that men should act regardless of and/or in contradiction to the facts of reality. That said, I say that both the liberals and progressives act against reason because almost all of their programs are in breach of reality and of reason.

Therefore, “Reason is man’s only means of grasping reality and of acquiring knowledge—and, therefore, the rejection of reason means that men should act regardless of and/or in contradiction to the facts of reality.”

Is this neo-mystic group a promoter of freedom and individual rights?

No. What makes the Free-farters’ group dangerous to our nation, freedom and future is its dogmatic relativism. Some, if not most of them, hold that there are no such things as absolute. They rebuke the idea of absolutism as dogmatic and impractical as if their line of reasoning is not, when in fact reality itself is absolute. Whether they live or not is an absolute. And what is more ironic is when they chatter, “there are no absolutes,” they are simply proving the fact that they are uttering an absolute.

When the Free-farters proclaim they are for reason, logic, and man’s freedom, they are merely echoing that Orwellian credo: “WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.”

What is this neo-mystic group’s concept of science?

None except the fact that it confuses reason with science and even logic.

So you also claim that you offer a good defense of science? Did you know that science was born as a consequence or corollary of philosophy? Science cannot survive without an epistemological and philosophical foundation. If philosophy dies, science will be the next to perish. History tells you that the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment saw the propagation of science. I know that some of you utterly reject philosophy and ideas. But did you ever know that it is the philosophy of Aristotle that led to the propagation of science? Aristotle was the first philosopher of science, a fact clearly understood by the scientists and thinkers of the Age of Reason through St. Thomas Aquinas’ revival of Aristotelian philosophy in the medieval age. A true defender of reason and science truly understands what makes reason and science exist and prevail. A truly rational individual understands that science only exists in a free society governed by objective laws and principles and supported by a socio-political system that respects man’s nature and rights- Capitalism.

What is the moral code of this new-Nazi group?

Based on their advocacy, the moral code of the Filipino Freethinkers is altruism. The Free-farters, who are mostly welfare-statists and liberals, commit the same mistake as the religionists. First, they collectively hold the belief that man is the means to the ends of others. What is clear is that they consciously or unconsciously embrace the morality of altruism. This code of morality means that man is a sacrificial animal and that for man to be moral, he must put the interest of others above his own. Second, the Free-farters are welfare-statists, and this is proved by their collective, irrational and impractical defense of the Reproductive Health bill authored by some socialist lawmakers in Congress.

According to philosopher Ayn Rand, “the basic principle of altruism is that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value.

“Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice—which means; self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial, self-destruction—which means: the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good.”

Why is the morality of altruism evil?

The meaning of altruism is not simply kindness or generosity toward other people. Altruism means that man must serve others and that it is his duty to satisfy and fulfill the welfare of others. This kind of morality is not simply immoral; it is evil at best. It means that man must put the interests of others above his own. Altruism demands that man must do the impossible.

A society beleaguered by government controls and regulations cannot be considered a free society, so is a society that is based on the morality of altruism. Aristotle’s law of identity postulates that contradictions cannot exist. Thus, for a society to be free, it has to embrace a certain type of socio-economic system that is consistent with man’s nature and rights. Man’s nature suggests that he cannot exist in a society that regards him as a sacrificial animal. Man’s rights also suggest that man has to live in a society that embraces rational principles and objective moral ideals. This is how the United States of America developed and became the most prosperous nation in the world.

Do ‘some’ Filipino Freethinkers believe in existence?

My many encounters with some of the Filipino Freefarters exposed them as nihilists, hardcore relativists and skeptics. In fact, they even declared, “existence doesn’t exist.” If it is true that “existence doesn’t exist,” then what are we? If this is their dogmatic belief, then all is nothing, according to the nihilistic, relativist assumption of the Filipino Free-farters.

Do they regard ideas or philosophy as nothing or impractical?

Evidence shows that the only possible answer is YES. One of the hardcore Freefarters claimed that ideas and philosophy “do not matter,” and champions what he calls beliefs “based on science and math.” However he is silent as to how he would present his argument without relying on a particular premise. This nihilistic Freefarter refused to understand that when logic is employed, scientific facts, mathematical data, and statistics are merely secondary. They are merely employed to back a certain premise.

Philosophy is defined as the science that studies the fundamental nature of existence, of man, and of man’s relationship to existence. Remember that the Freefarters declared, “existence doesn’t exist.”

Ayn Rand one said: “As a human being, you have no choice about the fact that you need a philosophy. Your only choice is whether you define your philosophy by a conscious, rational, disciplined process of thought and scrupulously logical deliberation—or let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarranted conclusions, false generalizations, undefined contradictions, undigested slogans, unidentified wishes, doubts and fears, thrown together by chance, but integrated by your subconscious into a kind of mongrel philosophy and fused into a single, solid weight: self-doubt, like a ball and chain in the place where your mind’s wings should have grown.”

What’s the main goal of the Filipino Freethinkers?

Their website claims that they seek to promote “freethought, science, and reason.” However, action speaks louder than words. Most of their website articles focus on the destruction of religion. If some atheists respect the establishment of religion in this country, it appears based on their web articles they advocate for the eradication of religion, perhaps through even political means. To prove this premise, better check the contents of their website.

Is there such thing as atheistic movement?

The answer should be none because atheism is not to be regarded as a godless religious sect, political or cultural collective, or any association or group.

There is no such thing as an “atheist mindset” or an “atheist movement.” Atheism per se hasn’t inspired and doesn’t lead to anything in particular because it is an effect—not a cause—and there are countless reasons for a person to not believe in God, ranging from vicious to innocent to noble. The newborn baby lacks a belief in God, as does the Postmodern Nihilist, the Communist, and the Objectivist—but each for entirely different reasons having dramatically different implications. So lumping all of these together under the “atheist” label as if that were a meaningful connection is profoundly confused. Yet this is exactly what the New Atheists do and encourage: they talk about how there are so many atheists out there, and advocate their banding together into an atheist community to seek fellowship, foster cultural change, build a political voice, and so on.

So why is there a need to expose this neo-mystic group?

The primary reasons for exposing this group are the following:

The Filipino Freethinkers’ collective is an enemy of:






The Free-farters are deceptively hiding behind the guise of reason, and that their group— a mélange of various collectivist “isms” tossed into a single anti-concept: Freethinkers (which has no objective, specific meaning at all)—is simply a socialist/communist caucus masquerading as an ardent defender of freedom and man’s rights.

Whether they know it or not, their ugly scheme is clear and unequivocal—they are simply employing a semantic strategy in order to appear rational and sensible in the public eye—and that their purpose is not the alleged preservation of freedom and of the rights of men in this country, but the destruction of these same ideals, which they allegedly claim to protect, by calling for more government roles, controls and intervention in the name of such pro-poor mantras as “common good,” “public welfare,” “social justice,” “egalitarianism,” “democracy,” and “greater good.”

The Free-Farters and the PLAGIARISM ISSUE:

Filipino Free-Farters’ EPIC FAIL!

On Pathological Lying and Free-Farters’ Intellectual Exorcism

To Filipino Freethinkers: Your Plagiarism is INCURABLE!

A BIG INSULT To Bloggers!

The Highly Appalling Plagiarism of the Filipino Free-farters


Find out the EVIL and IRRATIONALITY of the Filipino Free-farters:

Exposing the evil and lies of the Filipino Freethinkers: Filipino Free-farters: The New Mystics of Our Age

On how and why they distort the concept of reason: Filipino Freethinkers Versus Reason

What is their morality or code of ethics: Freethinkers or Free-farters?

On their being state-welfarists: Why the Filipino Free-FARTERS Would Love Universal Health Care?

On their IRRATIONALITY and pragmatism: Of Utter Dishonesty and Misrepresentations

On how they formed a cult of anti-reason: The Psychology of the Anti-Population Cult

34 Comments leave one →
  1. March 29, 2010 3:38

    Great article. Their relativism and support for the RH bill is really dangerous, the first reveals their philosophic foundation which would destroy the justice system if ever it got a wider following and the second reveals their political ideals, that it is okay to steal from A to give to B.

    • March 29, 2010 3:38

      Careful, Joshua. It seems that the Freefarters who know you can spit anything they like just to release their gastrointestinal hate and anger. This blogsite is under attack by the nihilist Free-farters. They will do everything- spam and post derogatory, slanderous and irrational comments- just to prove their idiocy and irrationality…

      • March 29, 2010 3:38

        I’m part of the Filipino Free-farters and our group sucks! We believe that existence does not existence, ergo all, including my panty, is NONEXISTENT… all I know is spamming and spamming and spamming this site because I just hate anyone who attempts to expose the Filipino Freethinkers’ evil, anti-reason agenda. That’s all we know, HATE, HATE and HATE. It’s who we are… Yeah, we are a group of evil, nazistic Free-farters who’s got nothing but flatulence!

      • March 30, 2010 3:38

        If the idiotic Freefarter above were brave enough to spit invectives and if he claimed to be a defender of reason science and logic, why not reveal his true identity? Posting anonymously of derogatory, hate-filled comments is an act of COWARDICE and UTTER IDIOCY…

  2. Ardeen Roy Diamante permalink
    July 8, 2010 3:38

    You sir, are an absolutist who in another lifetime would probably be the very Communist you despise. LOL😄

    • July 8, 2010 3:38

      That’s pathetically funny and amusing. Congratulations! You’ve just exposed your utter ignorance and stupidity. I was so right in saying that all leftists, liberals and their sympathizers are stupid. This is a fact. For your information, leftism or socialism is a by-product of not merely relativism, but anti-reason and stupid mind as well.

      It seems that you don’t know what you’re talking about. Your ignorance/idiocy is simply hilarious. Do you know the real concept of absolutism- of relativism? Perhaps you believe that words have no exact meaning. That’s a good example of nihilistic idiocy. Check my posts on the matter:

      Absolutism Versus Relativism
      Richard Dawkins’ Gibberish on ‘Absolute Morality’


      • Ardeen RoY diamante permalink
        July 12, 2010 3:38

        No, I meant the absolutism that you alone are right while everyone else is wrong. Everyone else in the know, know that the world is divided between black and white but shades of grey. You’re unquestionable certainty in all things is something so eerily familiar. It is frightening. But then that’s the problem with “Objectivism”, it’s not pure objectivity.

      • July 12, 2010 3:38

        Well, it’s because all leftists are idiots, that’s why… That’s the only explanation to your funny observation.
        It seems that you have truly imbibed the traits of all liberals and leftists- they are fond of resorting to ad hominem attack. Just attack the idea and not the author.

  3. P Smith permalink
    July 18, 2010 3:38

    What a clueless idiot. The number of lies in the above drivel is countless, but that’s no surprise given that he’s a rabid godbot.

  4. jinky g permalink
    August 9, 2010 3:38

    you’re a pathetic excuse for the “intellectual” that you project.

    just because you live comfortably in whatever made-up concept of society you have in your head doesn’t mean everybody else does. and just because you can only come up with gathered philosophies and beliefs and ideals of others more intelligent than you and somehow tailor fit them to whatever twisted belief you now have does not make you or any of the trash you write credible, believable or worth listening to. not one original thought in any of your writings, sir, and i guess you’re proud of that fact… which just goes to show how really smart you are. and how much people should listen to you.

    “just attack the idea not the author” — this is funny as the entire article above is an attack to all “free-farters”. so pitiful that someone so opinionated can’t handle opposition from those he so fervently opposes. oh well. thank god i’m a free-farter, otherwise i’d be like you, and that’s not a good thing. not a good thing at all.

  5. John Galt permalink
    August 15, 2010 3:38

    Who am I?

  6. Artaxerxes of Prague permalink
    October 16, 2010 3:38

    Let the free thinkers, humanists, liberals have their own way Whatever the future consequences, Nazism, let it happen. No matter what you, wanna-be pseudo intellectuals say, there’s nothing you can do. Rant and complain, it is the heads of the government that must be obeyed, not the voices of the irresponsible majority. The terms “absolutism”, “nihilism” and many such human nonsense were spawned merely out of the free-thinker’s, or atheists’ attempt to resist all forms of authority, and that’s impossible. God alone has the absolute freedom. And His authority, His Ten commandments (including the Sabbath commandment) is still His law which He imposes on and obliged the humankind to follow, and we still are all guilty because we don’t do them. Confused which religion is to be followed? Read the Bible, not the interpretations of the theologians who knew nothing of Hebrew or Greek. Confused where to pray? Don’t go to any human priest or pope or Mary. We have “a great high Priest…Jesus the Son of God” (Hebrews 4:14-16). Confused what to believe? -to believe in nothing, to be an atheist, theist, or religionist? Believe in Jesus Christ, Who alone can give us eternal life (John 17:3; John ch. 14). Confused on how to live? Live the life of Christ, -that humble, unselfish life, full of love and good works.

    Then stop philosophizing which will not give you any hope at all, it is a waste of time to study the various winds of human opinions. Go to the Fountain of life and wisdom! Complicated reasoning is as cold as the frigid ice. There is more life in actively helping ailing people outside your computer room. Stretch your heart and you’ll have more friends. Stretch your self-conceited mind, and you’ll have enemies. Argue endlessly, and you’ll draw into your person the abhorence of all. Nothing can be gained by wasting your time worshipping human reason.

    Philosophizing is pure waste of time. I would rather learn a trade that can make me useful and productive, and live a life peacefully rural and content, waiting for Christ to come. Or to die contented,

    • October 16, 2010 3:38

      But your drivel is not even science or cabbage or spinach or carrot or sari-sari store but FULL OF CRAP, free-farter troll. It appears you’ve just created your account (Facebook) just to comment here… Where the hell’s your science, farters?

  7. Jose Hidalgo permalink
    November 17, 2010 3:38

    You sir… Are an Idiot…

    • November 17, 2010 3:38

      They’re trollin’… they’re hatin’… oh! freefarters indeed. thanks for describing these freefarters for who they are vince! i love this blog.

      hey ff troll: you IS the idiot! haha!

  8. down2one permalink
    November 26, 2010 3:38

    i would like to address one little point in your post regarding philosophy and science.

    first, aristotle was never a scientist. he was a great philosopher, true that, but a scientist he was not.

    his method of gaining knowledge was through pure logic and contemplation. (remember, he was the dude who claimed that matter was made up of four fundamental elements: fire, earth, water, and air.) aristotle’s work were so widely accepted that soon enough, they became unquestionable, almost dogmatic. this was why for hundreds of years, nobody bothered to check whether aristotle’s teachings accurately represented reality or not.

    enter galileo. he suffered a lot of criticism from people because he believed that to be able to accurately represent reality, conclusions should be based on observation and facts, not established dogma.
    and that is exactly what science is all about. observation and experimentation (to put it simply).

    and that is where the difference between science and philosophy can be drawn. contemplation vs observation.

    while it is true that logic is a major driving force for science, it is not the only force that drives it. science needs evidence to back its claims, it requires rigorous testing and re-testing of data. if the results don’t match the hypothesis, then we change the hypothesis to more accurately match the data.

    we can’t do that in philosophy. there is no way to test a philosophical claim (‘truth is relative’ for example).

    so from an outsiders point of view (that’s me, by the way, mwahaha) :
    you and the free-farters disagree on your philosophies (eg: ‘existence does not exist’, ‘absolutes exist’, etc)
    but i bet you guys would never disagree that the planets orbit around the sun.

    in closing…
    to the author: please refrain from using ad hominem attacks against these so-called free-farters. you said it yourself ‘attack the idea, not the author’
    to the free-farters: if you really believe that ‘existence does not exist’, then i challenge you to back it up with evidence. try jumping from my sister’s condo window, for instance. she lives in the 8th floor.

    peace, love and sex \m/

    ps: i hope i made sense

    • November 26, 2010 3:38

      I’m sorry but you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about.

      You said: “first, aristotle was never a scientist. he was a great philosopher, true that, but a scientist he was not.”

      The word ‘scientist’ was not yet applied during Aristotle’s time, but it is this man who laid down the foundation of science. In fact it was Aristotle who used the word “science”. For Aristotle, “all science (dianoia) is either practical, poetical or theoretical” (Metaphysics 1025b25).

      Aristotle established the foundation of science. That’s a fact, an irrefutable fact. Anyone who shares your claim doesn’t understand the historical and proper concept of science. There can be no science without philosophy. Philosophy is the forest from which the trees (e.i., special sciences) would grow. Even Albert Einstein understood this, as he based his theory of relativity on the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. Without Aristotle and his philosophy, it would probably take another one thousand years to discover the foundation of science. I discussed his matter here

      If you want to know the correlation between philosophy and science- and between Aristotle’s philosophy and the scientific achievements from the time of Galileo up to the time of Newton, better buy yourself a copy of Dr. David Harriman’s book titled The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics.

      Here, Harriman presents the result of a collaboration between scientist and philosopher. Beginning with a detailed discussion of the role of mathematics and experimentation in validating generalizations in physics-looking closely at the reasoning of scientists such as Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Lavoisier, and Maxwell-Harriman skillfully argues that the inductive method used in philosophy is in principle indistinguishable from the method used in physics.

      I’m sorry but you didn’t make any sense…

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        yeah i clearly do not know what i’m talking about… of course i don’t. it didn’t even make sense to me.

        *bow to your philosophical superiors!*

        thanks for the links…


        … master

        *that’s better*

      • November 26, 2010 3:38

        Well, it would be hypocritical and absurd of me to say “you know what you’re talking about” when you don’t. I’m just being honest.

        What I mean is, don’t come here and comment without having enough ammunition. Well, what you said clearly confirms my claim that you people are anti-science and anti-reason.

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38


        copy-paste is teh winnar!!!!

      • November 26, 2010 3:38

        You want correction?

        “Here, Harriman presents the result of a collaboration between scientist and philosopher. Beginning with a detailed discussion of the role of mathematics and experimentation in validating generalizations in physics-looking closely at the reasoning of scientists such as Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Lavoisier, and Maxwell-Harriman skillfully argues that the inductive method used in philosophy is in principle indistinguishable from the method used in physics.”

        If you want the best example of copy-paste work, I can give it to you with full details here

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        wait wait last…

        i am not anti-science, and i am not anti-reason

        and what do you mean “you people”? (<- i got to use that line! haha!)

        if you think i'm a free-farter, i'm not. you're stereotyping me because your awesome copy-paste abilities presumes pwnage of 'inferior ammo'.

        no i'm not a free-farter, although i fart where and when i please. i am not associated with the people you ad hominemly (if there ever were such a word) target in your blogs.

        peace, love, and lots of sex \m/

      • November 26, 2010 3:38

        Well, it’s improper to take everything a troll says… Again, about the copy-pasting here’s a good one wherein I copy-pasted the works of a freefarter

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        wait pinaka last…

        “If you want the best example of copy-paste work, I can give it to you with full details here

        ppps: i WAS a member of filipino freethinkers on facebook. ‘WAS’ a member because after reading that link, i definitely do NOT want to be in a same group with people like that. also, i registered in forum called filipino freethinkers. i asked the forum if they were associated with the facebook group and they said no. and now i’m suspicious… in defense of myself, being a member does not mean i am one of them…

        goddammit! peace, love, and lots of great sex y’all!

      • xyxy permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        ” in defense of myself, being a member does not mean i am one of them…”

        You mean “being a FACEBOOK/forum member…”? What are you suspicious of?

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        You mean “being a FACEBOOK/forum member…”? What are you suspicious of?

        your icon, i’m suspicious of your icon.

      • xyxy permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        Sir, are you questioning the puppy’s ability to laugh?

      • down2one permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        i am suspicious of the puppy’s ability to be cute, and his ability to pose in a very un-puppy like stance…

        there is a conspiracy here i’m thinking…

  9. down2one permalink
    November 26, 2010 3:38

    i am suspicious of the puppy’s ability to be cute, and his ability to pose in a very un-puppy like stance…

    there is a conspiracy here i’m thinking…

    • xyxy permalink
      November 26, 2010 3:38

      Sir, I see that you are very much worried. Your head had turned pointy and green. But I don’t see how anyone could link the puppy’s uncanny ability to pose like a human to a conspiracy. I believe you are but a trolling troll trolling. I say leave the puppy alone or GTFO.

  10. johnzkee92 permalink
    August 19, 2011 3:38

    Note how many times he commited ad populum which is false generalization…
    and I thought that Freethinkers weren’t united so how could you say that one thought is the same throughout all the members… I also noted that… Instead of attacking the bill most of the blogs here attack those supporting it… if you debate with a copy of it and not some distorted idea on your mind such as the bill “imposing” the use of contraceptives… I’ll bet you’ll be proven wrong

    and this… Crush them!… I note how fascist the author is for wanting to kill those who differ from his beliefs. Note that this people have been fighting for their rights even before you were concieved. Try putting yourselves in their shoes. Judging the way you wrote it, you are no different from the Inquisitors who punished, tortured and kill those who are against the Catholic Church such as Galileo Galilei who was persecuted for stating that the “Sun revolves around the Earth.” in contrary to what the Church believe that the Earth is the Center of the Solar System… Seriously, we need another Carl Sagan if we are to eliminate Religious and Cultural Barriers. or Better yet I could move to another country.

    • August 19, 2011 3:38

      I’m interested to know whether you understand what generalization means. Kindly give some examples based on your allegations here.

      As to this link… What’s your proposal then? That the military should not crush the rebels who use military force not only against government armies and agents, but also civilians? If the military is not going to crush them, what should we do then with the armed rebels who seek to overthrow the government and then abolish property rights?


  1. The pseudoscience and pseudo-intellectual Fililipino Freethinkers, their trolls and sockpuppets « aristogeek
  2. Expose the Filipino Freethinkers as Enemies of Reason, Science, and Freedom! | VINCENTON

Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: