You Are Loved

I feel compelled to say this, today, to those who most need to be acknowledged.  I know your experience with evil in your past lead to the strength you developed which lead to doing battle with evil and overcoming it;  and being able to continue to do so whenever it tries to retake control. 

Because you chose love, not revenge and retribution, your spiritual evolution is a blessing to you.  Getting to that point can be a difficult choice each time it is necessary to do so, especially the first time -  but you succeeded.  And through the work you do in life your choice is a blessing to everyone in your life as it enables others to more easily spiritually evolve. 

Your spiritual evolution is an empowering inspiration to all with whom you come in contact, especially family and friends, but also including those who have found themselves on a similar path in life even though the environments in which this occurred has been different for each.  The work is easier and more fulfilling when done together;  because there will be more battles and the value of not doing battle alone will increase as our appreciation increases for those we encounter along the way who are also successfully fighting similar battles against the same evil.

Those who have repeatedly won spiritual battles alone, highly value those in their lives whose natural inclination is to battle similar evil in similar ways, no matter what disguise the evil wears - and it will always try to fool with a disguise.  We are all stronger and more adept when doing  battle, together.  The differences so many like to make a problem of are only superficial, even though these differences occur because of the environments in which we live due to  the attachments we have in life which are not superficial.  With levity, because levity is actually a dimension of spiritual evolution, I have to say:  may the force be with you - live long and prosper.

Inspiration and Empowerment

I have  known the difference between the blessing of a walk-in and an intended possession by evil since before age 2 1/2.  I will not go into how and why here.  But I have known the difference nearly my entire life.  That means I have understood for nearly my entire life that we all need empowerment and inspiration from one another to be able to rise about the limits and obstructions of those to whom we are attached in life; those who we allow to create obstructions and limits in our lives when it is not possible for us to simply walk away.  Some of us did need to walk away, eventually, to be able to survive and be who we are.  It is never easy, particularly when it is familial evil in the form of damaging bad habits considered "traditional" family traits which we must walk away from when they are still accommodated by some in the immediate and extended family who are determined to superimpose generations of unacceptable damaging "family ways" onto our lives also. 

How can those who host evil actually spiritually evolve as long as they are willing to host the evil?  That is the question.  They tolerate the evil but want to blame its presence on those who were designated within extended family as “scapegoats” to be made responsible for hosting the negativity the evil creates, to which those who do the scapegoating are addicted.  Such people do not always know the damage they are doing.  But that is evil’s way and those who choose to host evil project the harm it does onto others in an effort to blame them, instead, for its presence.  That is not spiritual evolution.  And it requires walking away, even when it is from those close to us because the evil they refuse to deny leads them to who want to limit and obstruct our spiritual evolution, imagining it improves their own lives to do so as they punishingly cling to damaging family "tradition". 

Why?  Those intentionally difficult people in our lives seem to imagine that if they recognize we are spiritually evolving it will result in value they too want to claim.  In the less spiritually evolved it will take the form of them wanting to be competitive and possessive and controlling of us, viciously so in some cases. They seem to want to feel left behind as they observe that we are making progress.  But that ongoing reaction eventually results in the need to leave them behind because they  become thoughtlessly demanding and  controlling of our availability which interferes with our work and with us being available to them as we are able to be. 

Thing is we all work within the environments in which we place ourselves, so how we earn our ways forward in life  will differ.  As such, observing progress of others, especially those closest like family, unfortunately, invites from the less evolved, envy, jealousy, greed, narcissistic control issues - even when they are able to observe that we are working hard to achieve progress despite the many obstacles they have worked hard to create for us because they see us succeeding.  Thus, for some of us it truly is also better for those folks for us to walk away from their presence, influence, and efforts to control our lives.  Because, as long as that is what is evoked in them by our presence in their lives, they will not evolve.  And they will also want to continue to hold back those who they allow to evoke that in their lives, feeling justified because that is how the family has always functioned.  

Why? They can not stop blaming the evil they experience on the previously  designated family scapegoats, never having questioned or known that those who made those designations in earlier generations were possessed of the familial evil when they did so.  We have already said no to that evil and will not stop doing so. By walking away we refuse to accommodate those who willingly accept that evil, and their efforts to superimpose it on us including indirectly when they do not actually know that is what they do by accommodating familial evil as "tradition".

Acknowledged and Started the Battle Does Not End

We must all do battle against evil together.  However those who do not recognize it as such, instead accommodate and host it and want to require us to do so, also.  That requires those of us who do not accommodate it to take our leaves of those who do if we are not to limit their spiritual evolution by being available to them in their lives; which, if we do not leave is also a choice to allow them to continue to limit our evolution too - becoming a vicious downward spiral  of blame which accommodates the familial evil, both directly and indirectly.

Leaving does not mean we will refuse to welcome those we have had to walk away from in our lives when/if they are ready to evolve beyond hosting the evil we refuse to accommodate as the “cost” of the connection family and some friends want to demand of us if we are to be part of their lives.  Those connections simply can not actively exist without harm resulting as long as some want to accommodate the evil some of us refuse to accommodate.

To those who are not ready to rise above the evil - you are loved.  To those who have risen above it and continue to refuse to accommodate it you are loved, trusted, and respected.  To those who are knowingly working at rising above it, you are loved and respected.  Be inspired as you encounter and are motivated by those you recognize as having gone before you - and welcome to the reality of mutual battle against evil.  Once you survive doing it entirely alone the first time except for your divine connection, future efforts will not feel as isolating. 

There will always be battles against the evil you have chosen to deny.  However, the plateaus we reach, increasingly together with other souls we recognize as similarly evolving, will be less potentially damaging along the way because of actually knowing numerous others are on a similar journey toward the same destinations, as we each continue to find ourselves in additional dimensions further along the way on our journeys of spiritual evolution.

Are Men Afraid of the #metoo Movement?

Talk about an assumed attitude of privilege which also embraces ageism!  On a news program, today, a young woman was saying one of the negative side-effects of the #metoo movement was that men no longer feel comfortable around young women.  Really?  Really!  I mean Really?!  All I could think was are you sure you don’t want to rethink and reword that comment?

I agree that the #metoo movement has an effect of  making some men uncomfortable because of fearing they could be falsely accused.  Men, in general, do not deserve to have to be fearful because of those in their ranks who are violators, especially those who are serial offenders.  But woman, in general, also do not deserve to be in fear of being attacked by men, because when they do report violations they are not believed so those who violate get away with violating instead of being apprehended. 

The problem is with dishonesty, and an unwillingness and inability to discern what is and is not factual - to the point of denial which results in a lack of thorough investigation.  The only people who do not invite investigation are the violators and those who enable them.  That is a truism.

It is the men violating who are at the foundation of the fear some men have of being dishonestly accused, not the  woman who  have chosen to report violations and expect to be believed to the point of an investigation being mandatory because of reporting the violation.   If there was not so much refusal to believe woman and investigate the violations they report, then there would not be so much fear in men who are not violators. 

And what about men who may not be sure about whether or not they have been considered violators? Well, wondering, alone, makes a statement.  If a man makes an effort to contact someone he may need to find clarity from, then it is a statement which is an indicator of decency, as long as the intention for contact is not intended to be obnoxious and threatening.

Clearly, the refusal to believe woman is associated with the high numbers of violators, and repeat offenders in particular, who  have the power of influencing others to the point that others choose the corruption of enabling the violators and their offenses.  So it is understandable there has been an increase in some  men fearing they could be unjustly accused.  I think that fear is likely to be directly proportional to the amount of women who are unjustly accused simply because they are not believed and their claims are not properly investigated when they do report violations.

The way to minimize fear is for thorough, objective, investigations which are never subject to the corruption of threats and/or  pay-off by violators who claim their careers and lives will be ruined when they are held accountable.  They, and apparently, the mores of our society have been buying into not ruining the lives of violators, and instead condoning the ruining of the lives of those who were violated. 

And of course it must be stated that some boys and men have been violated, and that some people have been violated by same sex violators. It also must be stated that #metoo is not only about sexual assault, rape, unwelcome touching and sexual innuendo in the workplace, but that it is also about harassment of all types in the workplace and everywhere else. 

However,  the issue is about reporting violations which are not believed and not investigated which  becomes a situation that precipitates the fear of  being unjustly accused because of not being believed, and adequate investigation being withheld.  It is the conundrum  of a stereotypical "vicious circle".  In reality logic tells us that the problem is disbelief, and that the only way to alleviate that is to investigate claims until all the facts make evident exactly what happened.  It really is that simple.

What I do not agree with, and what stinks of privilege and ageism in a young woman "of a certain age" who is clearly old enough to know better, is that she said men do not feel comfortable around “young women” - as if older women invited violation, or acquiesced to and wanted to be violated in their younger years - as if they are not still considered potential targets of violation along with anyone else violators want to violate and believe they can get away with violating. 

If it would not come across as sexism and ageism I might say that perhaps part of the problem of fear is actually the attitude of righteous privilege which some young and not so young woman want to assume - those who have not learned the wisdom of extending forgiveness to individuals who give them the opportunity to do so.  When in doubt, extending that opportunity is always the correct choice and the only one which will alleviate fear.

Prosecute the Scoundrels to the Full Extent of the Law

What is wrong with this damned state of New Mexico, and this damned city of Albuquerque, which together refuse to stop children from being brutally killed by those who are supposed to care!!!!  There has to be an end to it.  I can not believe there are people in the lives of the children and the adults responsible for being their parents or guardians, who  have not realized there are dangers for the children and reported the huge red flags indicative of those dangers!!! 

In fact, if news reports are accurate, I know the dangers have been reported, even several times in some cases, and that either law enforcement, or the social agencies which are supposed to handle such problems, often both, have failed to respond appropriately to the warnings of wrong-doing!  There must to be an end to accommodating the evil of ill-intended bottomless hate and incompetency, together, that is the cause. An end!!  Anyone who makes a decision to allow children to stay in dangerous homes or puts them in the care of those who should not be trusted with their care, is wrong to criminal extent. 

It is past time those responsible for not responding appropriately are removed from their jobs, and apprehended for their crimes of willful neglect which encouraged and enabled the continuing perpetration of the crimes.  They are accomplices who enable the continuing intolerable abuse resulting - predictably resulting - in the deaths of children.  Fact is the same happens to adults in danger - but this is primarily about how and why young children end up in environments which result in them being killed.

 

Prevention

There is an underlying issue which can be preventative, and that is birth control.  However some people are so obsessed with preventing abortion they can not see past the noses on their faces to recognize that birth control is the answer to preventing later crimes, even  if that form of birth control must sometimes be abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.  Instead those people want to create policy that forces child-bearing, which then results in young children  being killed by those who are supposed to care, but never did. 

Yes, birth control to include the extreme of abortion, is an  impossibly difficult choice for people who want to accommodate superimposed religious control in their lives instead of their own common sense when it comes to choices they have the foresight to know will do the least possible harm all the way around.  But people are able to come to terms with the choices they make.  The problem is the hypocritical politicians who want to try to create  cognitive dissonance in individuals, and at a societal level.  They are the worst perpetrators when they try to redirect political attention to personal issues which can not and should not be legislated based on superimposed religious beliefs of specified religions.  That effort is  unconstitutional, actually i.e. the superimposing of beliefs associated with specified religions. 

Family Planning Is a Personal Matter Not a Legislative Matter

For example, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I know of no Bible verses which say birth control is not permissible.  As I recall, be fruitful and multiply  is advised.  I did say advised not dictated because my personal view of religion is that it is advisement not dictatorial governing which tries to deny and discredit one's own divine connection and ability to discern guidance from it.  Most reasonable people have a similar perspective which is why the conditions associated with being fruitful and multiplying are a personal choice for true believers.

Allow me to point out that be fruitful and multiply prolifically like rabbits do, is not what is advised in the Bible. I take that to mean that reasonable and responsible people can be trusted to plan the amount of fruitfulness they can accommodate and when they are prepared to start being responsibly fruitful.  This is an example of religion concerning itself with birth control as a tacked-on people-made dictate of religion which really is not a tenet of religion, is it.  As such, neither birth control nor abortion are included in sacred religious texts.  It is not as if either was unknown and unpracticed in time and place.  They simply are not addressed in religious texts.

It is not my job to tell people what to believe.  But it is the job of all of us to prevent the superimposition of the tenets of any specified religions in the form of efforts to legislate policies dictated by people-made tacked on interpretation to specified religions which some buy into, personally.  Family planning needs to remain at the personal level - not be superimposed as unconstitutional national policy.  When all is said and done birth control is about family planning.  And family planning is a personal choice and responsibility in which policies demanding forced births have no place.

Irresponsible Family Planning and Killing of Young Children Are Connected

Morality and kindness can not be legislated.  They are personal choices.  We all know this.  It is not new information.  The extent to which individuals choose religion(s) to inform morality and kindness is also a personal choice - not a choice for politicians to try to make for we, the people, then try to superimpose with unconstitutional policy-making.  Of course this can be said about all issues which is why it is the job of we, the people, to remain vigilant about policies our elected and appointed government officials want to legislate - so that we can do our jobs of advising those who represent us, of our wishes.

When it is about the connection between preventing birth control and the killing of young children, if a specified religion really was that important to those individuals who want to use religion to make political issues out of choices individuals must make about responsible family planning because of personal necessity, then there would not be pregnancies in the first place would there - unless pregnancy was a result of rape, or failed birth control.  For someone else, especially politicians, to try to pick and choose what is and is not acceptable about the dictates of any specified religion, then to try to superimpose that as policy, is the height of intolerable hypocrisy - as well as unconstitutionality. 

That is the environment in which abortion as an extreme form of family planning is being politicized when family planning should not even be a political issue - unless it is to limit the number of children a couple is allowed to have, like China successfully did, as a way to handle the problems of overpopulation.  Genocidally neglecting vulnerable populations is not an appropriate way to handle overpopulation.  Neither is a national budget that dedicates more than half of the available resources to defense.  Yes, that pertains, because redirecting funds away from domestic needs highly contributes to the problems we experience that exacerbate over-population because of the reduction of needed available resources.

Religion as a Legislative Motivator

When intentional confusion is created about any religion based on a variety of different people-made interpretations tacked onto the sacred texts of religions through the years, then people either buy into the religious belief or they do not.  True believers do not decide to do and not do some things because of the slavish codification of later interpretation by people into what become dictates to, and in some cases corruptors  of a religion.  They do not misconstrue actual teachings about attitude and behavior, i.e.  morality issues, associated with the shared wisdom within sacred texts of the ways in which people can successfully peacefully coexist with one another.  

Let us not be coy.  Every reasonable adult who is literate is capable of understanding religious texts and interpreting them for oneself, and does so, no matter who does and does not approve.  Why else would there be so many folks who identify as a specific religion, but do not appear to actively practice the religion,  or to frequently  participate in the religious community except to socialize or unless they have children and need religious community to reinforce the values they are teaching their children? For some, religious beliefs are at the foundation of  spiritual evolution rather than primarily a competition associated with piety that is intended to be demonstrated to the religious community.  I mean really.  Those in the clergy with whom I am acquainted, associated with several religions and subdivisions within religions, are much more authentic people than a good number of the followers of the religion.  They simply do not have cause for concern about how pious they are perceived to be by others.

Given reality, legislators have no business trying to superimpose as policy what any specific religion dictates - what is and is not a violation according to a specified religion's tenets.  And they also have no business trying to selectively make some tenets of a specified religion into  political issues but not other tenets, particularly when the ones they want to legislate are based on religious morality which is dependent on the ones they do not want to legislate.  It is simply not done to attempt to superimpose the interpretation of sacred texts of any specified religion onto everyone through legislation - IF one is  a decent person who supports and defends our constitution.  It really is that simple.

Since the initial existence of all religions, they have been subject to having been politicized based on a variety of tacked on people- made interpretations associated with oral tradition and/or recognized sacred texts and beliefs.  And that type of confusion resulting in convoluted cognitive dissonance associated with religious beliefs, is a major reason why our founders decided on it not being allowable for government to specify a national religion.  By extension that decision is intended to protect government from religion, and religion from government, and we, the people, from superimposed politicized religious beliefs that are not our own. 

Birth Control/Abortion Issues Target the Rights of Single Woman

Consider, for example, if the religion whose tenets you want legislators to superimpose as legislation specifies marriage as a prerequisite to creating children, then you can not ignore the prerequisite of marriage and try to legislate family planning as being disassociated from that prerequisite, without creating a hypocritical double standard because of politically choosing what is and is not enforceable as a religious tenet.  Fact is it should be a moot point because superimposing religious tenets is unconstitutional.  But that has not stopped legislators from trying to superimpose a tenet of a specified religion associated with the part of family planning that is about scheduling children i.e. birth control, including the extreme of abortion when necessary.  So this is not a foolish comment I make about legislators wanting to superimpose selective religious tenets they buy into while ignoring prerequisite tenets.

Fact is that any legislation associated with birth control, including the extreme of abortion is intended to interfere with the unmarried single woman's right to family planning.  It puts all responsibility on the single women who become pregnant, by trying to religiously guilt trip them and  force them to give birth without being married, even when their family plan does not include being a single parent.  In other words it takes male responsibility out of the equation even though both a male and a female are required to create a life.  If this does not make sense yet, then stay with me because it will.  But first do not try to make this into an LGBTQ gender issue or a technology issue, because it is neither.  It is about making pregnancy solely an individual woman's responsibility and/or punishment when in fact it is a couples issue and choice even if half of the couple is irresponsible and not part of making decisions about family  planning. 

Why do I say single women are targeted by birth control and abortion legislation?  Because legislation of birth control is a moot point when it comes to married couples and simply not subject to legislation, marriage being considered sacrosanct, which means among other things that family planning within a marriage is not subject to the judgment of others.  So the fact is that birth control/abortion legislation is intended to prevent a  single woman from the right to schedule family planning, thus is a violation primarily of the rights of a single women.   A woman has a right to choose to bear children within a marriage rather than to be forced to bear children outside of a marriage.

Anyone who has ever been around children knows they deserve two parents who love one another, and who actually have planned for and want to give birth to and/or raise children together.  A woman has a right to plan family around a prerequisite of marriage.  And she also has a right to prioritize marriage so that she is not forced into marriage before she has prepared herself for marriage.  That often means education and career are priorities for young single women because following one's heart brings all that is good and right into one's life whatever that may be.  That is a concept associated with Spiritual Evolution 101.  However the troubles some folks cause because they do not even make it that far with their spiritual evolution by recognizing that is part of everyone else's spiritual evolution, also, are mind-boggling.  When it is meant to be, marriages happen when purposely harassing obstacles are not used to redirect and demand the attention and resources of individuals who are seeking and reaching the goals which enable them to serve their purposes in life.  That is true synchronicity which manipulated coincidences can not successfully masquerade as, no matter how clever and far-reaching the manipulation is.

At issue is, that if legislators want to concern themselves with family planning then they need to stop being concerned about connecting religious morality to birth control and abortion, just like they stopped associating religious morality with the LGBTQ issues - which actually should have been a harder sell than abortion given what is and is not stated in religious texts.  As such that is an indicator of how politicized family planning has become which focuses primarily on abortion and the foundation it rests on of specified religious belief that does not condone  birth control.  If legislators continue to want to be intent on regulating family planning, then they need to legislate mandatory preliminary conditions associated with child birth which are best for a couple and the children.  That would be marriage, economic stability which affords necessities and the cost of raising  children, plus agreement on when to start fitting into their lives, together, the creation of their own family, and how many children  can realistically be provide with the quality of life they deserve. 

In other words birth control and abortion are total non-issues when legislators focus on the requirements necessary for family planning and stop trying to make hot-button political issues out to birth control and abortion for single women who do not choose to raise children outside of marriage, or to have their priorities co opted by an unwanted marriage and/or an unplanned pregnancy.  Society has moved on from the 50's/60's forced-marriage-after-pregnancy-occurs problem so it is high time for legislators to move beyond it also and stop trying to victimize single women as if they alone are responsible for unplanned pregnancies and need to be prevented from making the best decisions for themselves and their future families.

The Environment in Which Young Children Are Killed

Let me be very clear.  It is not acceptable to apply the tenets of any religion in an effort to  legislate personal choice - in this case birth control, including early term abortion, because so many unwanted children end up dead when both birth control and abortion are legislated against.  Yes, that is directly related to the killing of young children.  And anyone who does not understand how targeting single women as intended victims of marriage with someone they do not want to marry, and targeting them as victims of unplanned childbirth, can and does highly contribute to the killing of young children, is neither paying attention nor thinking clearly. 

The social welfare system can not and does not provide all that is required to safely and successfully raise children as a single parent.  Sure some single parents can do it because of their already formulated good character, determination, drive, self discipline, even though they do not have training which allows them to do the work they would like to do.  And some single parents have an education and are working in a field that is fulfilling and includes a livable income which does not require them to depend entirely on social services to meet the needs of their families.  But what about those single and married women who were totally unprepared to become parents, then  become dysfunctional, perhaps were surrounded by people not good for them, and/or resorted to drugs, prostitution, theft, cheating the welfare system, and anything they could do to escape from that dimension of desperation, pain, and revulsion their lives had become?  That is the environment into which children are born who too frequently are abused and exploited until they end up dead.  It must stop. The first line of defense which can prevent the deaths of young children is effective birth control, including the extreme method of abortion when necessary.

Women have the right to avoid co-opting their life plans instead of being forced by circumstances they did not create to unexpectedly become single mothers who are dependent on welfare.  They have the right to not be  forced into marriage with someone they do not want to marry. 

The young children who are killed are a symptom of all that I have addressed and more.  But they also are a direct result of the negligence of those who could have prevented the deaths, but instead enabled them and are not being held accountable and prosecuted for what can only be understood as a combination of collective willful negligence and incompetency. 

God help us all if those same people in law enforcement and social services have been lead to believe they are protected  because of abiding by superimposed unwritten s.o.p. they must accommodate as a condition of keeping their jobs.

A.I. Nightmares

I read an article today citing Sputnik International about Swedish scientists,  who want to build robot replicas of dead relatives:  "Would YOU turn your loved one into a robot clone? Swedish scientists are using AI to build androids that are 'fully conscious copies' of dead relatives, report claims".  Yes, Sputnik International, and we all know whose news that is.  No matter.  All media has been on the A.I bandwagon, as of late.  And it is probably going to be THE industry for the young adult generation of today, like IT was for the previous generation.  What else can they do with so many jobs becoming computerized.  Best to get in on the ground floor and create the machines that will do the work people would otherwise have done.  Right?  But this is about far more than that.

My first thought was Wow!  What next! What do the Swedish people think about that!? I really do not want to be someone who "used to like Swedish people".  But common sense quickly came to the rescue. 

It gets worse, because it is obviously not only "Swedish Scientists" engaged in wanting to merge A.I. with people and to upload minds of the deceased to machines.  The article also says there is a Terrasem Movement Foundation in Vermont working on technology to transfer consciousness of people to computers.  And the article claims Elon Musk's Neuralink company is dedicated to the same.  Anyone not thinking this is headed toward the Borg way of life?

Unregulated Unethical Research

Tell me these are not government funded programs!  Please!  We can only guess how long funds have been funneled into such research through "the black ops budget" which essentially means no oversight and no regulation.

Thing is these unregulated unethical research efforts ordinarily do not make the news until they are actually happening.   Worse is when they are government funded and with no oversight.  And in the past month or so A.I. articles started saturating the news - with nearly fully grown technology except for the absent foresight which includes ethics, regulation, and oversight.  That means there has been a lot of work prior to all the A.I. hype in the press and on the news.  It is no secret Japan and China both have been obsessed with and working on A.I. for much longer.

Recorded and Impersonated

It is clearly all the more reason to e-mail (or text) instead of talk on the phone - particularly when "trapped" with long futile "recorded for training purposes" customer service (CS) calls, isn't it . . .

It has long been known the intent of some scam phone calls is to record one's voice so it can be used by crooks to impersonate.  The only difference with folks who use the "recording for training purposes" disclaimer is that unless you object their recording is legal.  Be that as it may, it does not mean unethical use of the recordings is legal.

And what happens when someone does not agree to the call being recorded and asks to talk to someone who does not need to be recorded "for training purposes"?  My guess is a refusal of service.  I do not know anyone who has ever tried to challenge that unreasonable "request".  Because the request is made in the form of a statement which requires refuting if one objects, a caller would need to make a point of refusing to permit the recording.

One Person's A.I. Heaven Is Another Person's A.I. Hell

When one's life has become a terribly resistant unreasonable facsimile in a false reality (usually known way before the threatening extreme, actually) it is very clear those ass-covering phone call disclaimers about being recorded actually mean those unscrupulous people are selling one's voice to unscrupulous folks who are using it in the way the article reveals - their cloning efforts, biological and/or A.I.  It adds a whole other dimension to "reality check", doesn't it.

The effort the article speaks of is the same as trying to imprison a person's soul in a dimension they have transcended i.e. where they do not belong and should not be. It would be analogous to the way religions describe purgatory and/or hell.

Don't believe it? Apply the scientific method and prove me wrong. I guarantee we need another law to protect individuals (living and dead!) by regulating how recorded phone calls (all recordings actually), photos, and animated videos can NOT be used - guarantee.