An ECZ is created by the set of beliefs in which the individual feels most comfortable, has some concept of the issues out of our own control, some concept of right and wrong or how to live righteously, and some understandable place they believe they belong within that absurd reality. Some satisfy their existential needs with the dogma of major faiths Chritstianity, Islam, Judeaism, Hinduism, Bhuddism, Wicken, Mormonism, Satanism, Darwinism, Agnostism, Aetheism, Nihilism, or others those political based dogmas such as Socialism, Communism, Libertarianism, Progressivism, Fascism, Despotism, Monarchy, Statism, Conservatism, Democracy, Academia, and still others with science based platforms such as Evolution, Intelligent Design (ID), MicroBiology, Biology, Chemistry, Biochemistry, Physics, Quantum Physics, Astronomy, and Geology.
Yes, ID is science based because it supports all accepted sciences, and only promotes the existence of specific ID dogma if some matter's existence cannot be explained by existing science, cannot be recreated by existing science, and is an entity that displays the structural characteristics that appears to be designed instead of occurring randomly. It attempts no explanation of what, why, when, how, or where of any possible external-to-our-universe entity or force. All it says is that the matter appears to be designed in some fashion and it's existence is unexplainable with our current scientific knowledge. Surprisingly to many,
Note: Academia is also a dogma consisting of tenure goal based nirvana, publish or perish, manipulation and/or misinformation to generate lucrative grants/funding, and a continuous self-inflating charade of intellectual superiority, extreme narcicism, and "a can't be fired eventual high paid sloth."
Unfortunately, differing ECZ's have been the cause of wars, discrimination, bigotry, violence, hatred, misinformation, misdirection, lies, and the incorrect assumption that a differing dogma is always a threat to our own dogma. This "against-my-dogma" phobia has existed for thousands of years and still exists today as the primary motivations for most violent and non-violent conflicts.
OK, so here we have all these dogma's fighting, squabbling, and attacking each other on all levels of human activity and throughout all of human civilization and history. Every dogma has extremists, moderates, and apathetic participants. Of any dogma most believers are moderates or are pretty much apathetic to the whole "death or my dogma" thing. There also exists the extremists, from any dogma, who all tend to stir the pot of discontentment, irritate other dogmas, and cause mistrust, tension, violence, and hatred between differing dogma cultures.
The extremists of any dogma are the ones who cause conflict. You see extremists on the right, left, and as part of any religious, political, and cultural dogma. Progressive Atheist journalists, writers, directors, and producers are perpetrating a century-long cycle of ridiculing, demonizing, and insulting religious dogma's, while embracing their elitist culture that naively says science dogma has all the answers. Extremist Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Bhudists, and Jews all are responsible for violence, intolerance, and death around the world. There is no question that radical Socialists, Communists, and Atheists have killed millions throughout history for their dogma. Even Radical Progressives have successfully influenced the killing of possibly million(s) of South Vietnamese, during the Vietnam war, by supporting America's unconditional "cut and run", both through media propaganda and targeted violence. Radical Christians evangelize extreme misinterpretations of the bible, for capitalist gain by being charlatans as a moral compass. Hypocrites and corruption are found to exist in all dogmas.
So what's the point of all this dogma talk ? It has to do with the humanity, history, reason, and role of the United States of America in this absurd reality. The US's original intent was to create a nation of laws allowing all cultures and religions. Laws created by the vote of the common people of America. As the demographics change so will the laws change to compensate. The laws are meant to represent the most common beliefs of the citizens. In most cases that is true. Historically, many atrocities, mistakes, and bigotry against certain cultures and dogmas had to be rectified through the legislative process and some through military conflict and violence. In most cases, the laws became adjusted for new cultures, dogmas, religions, and political preferences as they appeared in the melting pot. Throughout history there always seemed to be an internal U.S. conflict and then a solution from the people that resolved the issue through laws.
But now we are entering a new period in American social evolution. America is now the captive of dogma terrorists using all forms of attack on a daily basis to gain the strongest foothold in the America electorate. Muslims vs Jews, Atheists vs Christians, Progressives vs Conservatives, and even Science/Technology/Social Structure vs Religious Morality. This becomes very dangerous as many of these dogma's are not only conflicting ideologies but mutually exclusive in their teachings and beliefs, and oppressive in their implementation.
I recognize two major dogma's which are most threatening to America's future and stability. These dogma's are Progressive Liberalism, and Islam. These dogma's have started to eat at the very foundation of America's freedom of speech and thought. These dogmas are among the most contentious and mutually exclusive from each other and all other dogmas. The major dangers of these dogmas is best illustrated by their lack of devotion to the truth. Both openly encourage misinformation, misdirection, lies, deliberate omissions, and the "righteousness" of deception if it accomplishes their intended goal.
A dogma that promotes intentional lies to deceive others will do anything to attain its goal and can never really provide an ECZ. Yet certain worldviews believe they are righteous dogmas. If lies and deception are an essential part of the dogma, then there really is no fixed set of rules and laws that guide the believer. The dogma can be made up by the believer without risk or hesitation. Anything is possible. Anything is allowed. In Islam intentional deception is called Taqiyya. In Progressive Liberalism it is based on Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals suggestions for the intentional misleading of others.
The ferocity, anger, and determination of Islam to be completely intolerant of other religions/cultures and impose their devout belief of "submission to Allah" that leaves no room allowable for other religions. Christianity, despite its sordid, intolerant, and cruel history at least lets the believers know that final judgment is a godly decision, and believers should understand that true judgment is out of their hands. Similarly Jewish, Hindus, Bhuddists, and all major religions have a similar belief that final judgment is not up to the believers.
In contrast, Muslims believe they are an extension of Allah's control and have the right to kill and destroy anything that disagrees with the Qu'ran, the elder Imams, Mohammed, or Allah. To a muslim there is no question that Islam is the one and only true faith. All other religious believers are infidels that need to be disposed of immediately. Islam is based on the words of Allah and the actions and words of Mohammed.
Mohammed used violence and deception to force conversions during the birth of Islam, and therefore it is appropriate today for muslims to force similar conversions through violence and lies. Not only is it appropriate, but suras in the Qu'ran say muslims are required to force conversions and to obey Shariah Law. Shariah Law is based on the Qu'ran, other sacred writings in Islam, and in fact defines the laws that all citizens must live by.
You see Islam is not just a religion, it is also a political dogma. Shariah Law is incompatible with Western Law and society. If you apply Western Law to a situation, then you are breaking Shariah Law. If you are applying Shariah Law then you are breaking Western Law. In the most devout muslim countries, Saudi Arabia, Islam and Shariah Law are both the government judicial system and religion. There is no separation of church and state as understood in the western world.
This mutual exclusivity of Western and Shariah Law will end up in a major world war in the next few decades. These conflicting dogma's will be responsible for lots of death and destruction. Unfortunately, supremacy of the belief systems of these two dogmas, Western Law and Islam, can only be decided through violence. Western Law will play the defensive position to the constant Islamic offensive attacks. The attacks have been going on for years, and the number of occurrences will escalate in the next few decades.
Let's look at Conservative and Progressive Liberal journalism. If you talk to a journalist they'll describe it as almost a religion. A strong set of beliefs and rules they must obey to provide fairness, balance, and truthfulness to the citizens. I have not yet met a journalist who is either fair, balanced, or truthful. You see, journalism should be based on a complete presentation of all the facts of any topic. Currently, journalism is lewd, rude, crude, and has an intentional misinformational attitude.
Misinformation designed to favor either specific religious and political agendas. The source of the journalism defines the one-sided analysis of the truth they produce. The source creates its own relative accuracy and truthfulness. Progressive Liberals, often devotees of Saul Alinsky, believe lies are as good as the truth if it attains your goal. There is no problem with intentional lies being presented to the citizen to persuade someone of a point of view. Conservatives on the other hand, at least most of them, try to stick to the facts and let the chips fall where they may. For decades Progressives controlled the media and therefore they had more control over the "truth". Lately, with the emergence of conservative sources, a more complete picture is being presented to the citizen. The impact of more balanced information has had a remarkable impact on the American electorate.
Many Progressive Liberal Atheist journalists honestly believe they are smarter, have no need for the foolishness of religion, have to talk down to the American citizen, and that a citizens geography, state or city, determines their dogma and intelligence. Many Conservative Religious journalists believe Progressive Liberal Atheists are blatantly anti-religion, and believe anyone that is religious must be an inbred backwoods toothless cretin. On a daily basis every Conservative Religious political candidate is repeatedly called dumb, stupid, a moron, and not very bright. That is the sum total of juvenile Progressive intellectual arguments used to discuss the issues with the Conservative Religious community.
Conservative journalists have their own prejudices. They believe abortion is murder and is destroying human life. While progressives believe it is no more meaningful than the removal of a troublesome wart, even if a baby in the third trimester does not appear to look like any wart I have ever seen. The Progressive believes that a woman's body is always her own and the growing fetus is an alien invader that can be stopped whenever the mother pleases. If by accident a live birth occurs during an abortion that baby is ignored and left to die, regardless of how long that might take. The Conservative believes the fetus is a gift from god at conception, and the mother and baby must share the woman's body till delivery. The Conservative Religious extremist holds the shotgun that shoots the Progressive Liberal extremist who performs third trimester abortions.
The result of all these issues and impacts of dogmas is that conflict is inevitable between mutually exclusive dogmas, and the greater the lies from a dogma, the greater the eventual collapse of that dogma. As blatant lies are identified and realized by the electorate, educated principled citizens will denounce and turn their back on the offensive dogma. It might even create grass roots movements based on firm proven principals against the deceptions. Grass roots movements might even be called a "Tea Party". There is currently a Tea Party grass roots movement in this country that is angry with Journalists, Progressives, Liberals, faux-Conservatives, and other false dogma peddlers for presenting misdirection, misinformation, outright lies, and partisan opinion, rather than indisputable accurate facts that the reader can use to determine his/her own opinion.
