Thomas E. Blaylock Jr.

This book has an interesting collection of ideas. I like some of the ideas included in this book but there are other ideas that I do not personally support.

First off, when Thomas E. Blaylock Jr. refers to honest, clear thinking, he means Atheism. This is fine to me since "Magic Sky Man" hasn't really been on my radar for years now. Mr. Blaylock makes a number of interesting points about religion in general, and I wish I had found it earlier. For instance, when it comes to prayer, Blaylock mentions the audacity of begging "Magic Sky Man" for anything at all. Prayer is something common to most religions but when it comes to Christianity or any other religion it doesn't make much sense. Are you really suggesting that God doesn't realize that you want your father's cancer to disappear? Even the slightest bit of thinking on the subject reveals that prayer is rather idiotic. If it is all in God's Plan, what is the point of asking it for special favors anyway? Won't God just do what it always does? It reveals the Bible for what I always thought it to be, an out of control Fairy Tale. Now, this alone might make it so that you don't approve of my opinion, especially if you are religious but Blaylock mostly asks that you think for yourself rather than allow a higher authority to think for you.

Blaylock also asks why someone would willingly support such a juvenile and chauvinistic being, and I agree with this too. Of all the deities I can think of, I can't think of one more blood-thirsty and contradictory than the God of the Christian Bible.

The book is not perfect. I would be the first to admit this. The book really needs a proofreader and an editor. This does not take away his message, but it is rather distracting when random words in a sentence are capitalized for almost no reason whatsoever. There are also many errors in grammar and punctuation. So like I said, I don't know if this person would read this, but I really like his philosophy, but I don't agree with all of his political views and ideas. For instance, Blaylock is in support of going back to the Gold Standard since he states that our money is imaginary or something. I suppose that is true in the sense that it doesn't have a physical representation, but money is money. I suppose that is what bothers him, it doesn't have a basis in something that is real. Then again, I am not too familiar with how economics works.

Anyway, I would recommend this book to anyone. The problem is if you can take what he says and accept it.… (lisätietoja)