The Humanity Party®

For Immediate Release:
May 25, 2018

The Humanity Party®, in collaboration with a Marvelous Work and a Wonder®, Publishes Memorandum Challenging Humanitarian and Missionary Efforts of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church)

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah – May 25, 2018 – The Humanity Party®, a newly established American political party (est. 2015), has published a profound and well-researched Memorandum challenging the humanitarian and missionary efforts of the LDS/Mormon Church.  “Worldwide religious charities and NGOs are destroying the local economies and making life worse for the poor that these organizations are trying to help,” said Humanity Party® spokesperson, Christopher Nemelka.  “No one’s taken any initiative to point out how charitable organizations ignorantly exacerbate poverty, so we thought we’d take the issue directly to the wealthiest and most conservative church, per capita, in the world: the Mormon Church.”

The Memorandum also gives a brief summary of the origins of the Book of Mormon from a completely new and innovative point of view.  Nemelka, also the Messenger for the Marvelous Work and a Wonder®, points out, “The Mormon people have what they claim to be a companion to the Bible: their Book of Mormon.  Yet Mormons do not teach their members, or preach to potential converts, the true purpose of the Book of Mormon, which was originally meant to help the native American peoples of both North and South America, both economically and spiritually.”  The Memorandum disputes LDS doctrine and demonstrates various religious practices that Nemelka says are “very hypocritical and a detriment to the fight against poverty and inequality.”

The Memorandum can be viewed and downloaded at the link here.

For more information, visit humanityparty.com.

[NOTE: This document and its information is copyright of the Humanity Party® 2018. All rights reserved.

Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited other than the following:

• you may print or download to a local hard disk extracts for your personal and non-commercial use only
• you may copy the content to individual third parties for their personal use, but only if you acknowledge the Humanity Party® as the source of the material.

You may not, except with our express written permission, distribute or commercially exploit the content. Nor may you transmit it or store it in any other website or other form of electronic retrieval system.]

The Nuclear Age was introduced to all of Earth’s inhabitants on August 6, 1945, during World War II (1939-45).  An American B-29 bomber dropped the world’s first deployed atomic bomb over the Japanese city of Hiroshima.  The explosion wiped out 90 percent of the city and immediately killed 80,000 people; tens of thousands more would later die of radiation exposure.  Three days later, a second B-29 dropped another A-bomb on Nagasaki, killing an estimated 40,000 people.

After World War II, a nuclear arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States began and reached fearful and threatening speeds.  Each side boasted that it had the most powerful deployable nuclear weapons.  On October 30, 1961, the Soviet Union proved and supported its bragging rights by detonating the largest nuclear device ever detonated, and the most powerful man-made explosion in history.  The bomb was called the Tsar Bomba.  With a yield of 50 megatons of TNT—3000 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima—the Tsar Bomba was the culmination of a number of hydrogen bomb tests conducted throughout this time by both the Soviet Union and the United States.  Theoretically, the Tsar Bomba could have yielded as much as 100 megatons of TNT, but it would have resulted in a dangerous level of nuclear fallout.  Additionally, the delivery plane would not have had sufficient time to retreat to a safe distance.

The extreme damage and devastation wrought by thermonuclear weapons like the Tsar Bomba is inconceivable. If such a weapon exploded in any large city such as New York, Paris, Moscow, or London, its metropolitan area plus large portions of its surrounding suburbs would be completely destroyed and devoid of all life.

The United States and Russia (formally, the Soviet Union) have thermonuclear weapons that are theoretically 1000 times more powerful than the Tsar Bomba.  Neither side will disclose what types of weapons it actually has. Keeping the other side guessing is what maintains the peace between these two powerful nations.

The early Hiroshima bomb decimated 5 square miles, including every living human being.  If the Tsar Bomba is 3000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb, then, theoretically, the Tsar Bomba would have decimated 15,000 square miles.  And, theoretically, if there exists a thermonuclear weapon 1000 times more powerful than the Tsar Bomba, 15 million square miles, including every living human being, would be destroyed.

Who sat down and thought about creating such a terrible weapon that would have such devastating consequences to the human race?  Who conceived the idea and then acted on the idea to develop nuclear energy?  Did these people feel any remorse or concern for the ideas they conceived and experimented upon?

The Soviet nuclear physicist, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov (1921-1989), often referred to as the “father of the Soviet hydrogen bomb” because he headed the team that created the Tsar Bomba, would later became a human rights activist.  He won the 1975 Nobel Peace Prize.  After the Tsar Bomba was detonated, Sakharov wrote letters to Soviet leaders urging them to stop nuclear testing.  His warnings contributed to efforts by the United States and the Soviet Union to consider nuclear weapons treaties between the two world superpowers.  But when Sakharov published an article entitled “Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom” in 1968, in which he publicly dissented against the Soviet leadership’s policies and instead advocated for cooperation with the U.S., he was removed from his responsibilities on Soviet scientific research and development projects.  He was eventually convicted of anti-Soviet activity and exiled.  When the Soviet Union disbanded, Sakharov and his wife were released from exile and invited to Moscow in December 1986 by Mikhail Gorbachev as part of his domestic liberalization policy that led to the dissembling of the Soviet Union.

Sakharov was hardly the father of nuclear physics.  He had nothing to do with the development of the first nuclear weapons that took the lives of thousands of innocent human beings in Japan. We could name a few of the major progenitors of the Nuclear Age, but do they really deserve accolade?  Do they deserve any praise for what they did? They figured out how to harness the power of atoms—the building blocks of all matter.  Upon figuring it out, why did they use their knowledge to help create weapons of mass destruction?  That’s a question that each of these nuclear scientists (and they were mostly men) must ask himself.  If what you know contributes to death, destruction, and unimaginable misery, what kind of person are you if you share or utilize your knowledge, knowing that it could lead to such human misery?

Let’s theorize that you are a person who pursues an education in nuclear physics.  You study everything that has ever been published by all the nuclear physicists before you.  You develop a theory that only you know and understand.  Your idea can be used for good or for bad, and your idea is worth a lot of money, prestige, and popularity among your peers.  What would you do with your idea?  Would you tell others?  Would you weigh the options between the good your idea can do and the bad it can do, and then decide if you should share it with others?  Would you consider that although your idea could do a lot of good for humanity, in the wrong hands, it would do even more bad? What would be your decision?  

Your decision would become the ultimate sign and token of your personal humanity.  Would you sell the sign and token of your humanity for money, prestige, and popularity among your peers?  More than likely, as human nature is, most would.  Most would justify their decision based on the thought of how much good the idea can do, how much money can be made, and how popular one would become. They would deflect personal guilt by transferring the negative consequences to someone or something else’s responsibility.

On August 6, 1945, the U.S. President, Harry S. Truman, decided that the killing of tens of thousands of innocent people was justified and good.  His decision did end the war with Japan, but there are some who believe that war would have ended anyway.  Truman’s decision might have saved countless lives in an ongoing war, but was dropping the bomb Truman’s only option?  Couldn’t he have warned Japan about what was going to happen and then dropped the bomb on some isolated, uninhabited Japanese island to prove its power?

Let’s suppose that Truman’s decision was good and that the sacrifice of thousands of men, women, and little ones for a greater purpose is good. Let’s theorize that the sacrifice of MILLIONS of men, women, and little ones is good, IF the sacrifice would cause world peace, or at least cause the leaders to consider world peace.  

What if the United States had a thermonuclear weapon 1000 times more powerful than any other nation’s weapon?  Let’s call it, Dios Mío (OMG, Oh My God!).  Let’s suppose that Dios Mío could initiate cooperation between the world’s nations that would lead to peace upon Earth.  Should the U.S. show its power and explode the device for the entire world to see?  If so, should the U.S. detonate it in the middle of the Pacific Ocean in an uninhabited area?  Or should the U.S. drop it on Russia or China and take out one of its current superpower competitors?

How would the world respond to such incredible power?  Would it make a difference?

Did it make a difference when the United States showed its unprecedented power on August 6, 1945?  No!  It led to more instability and threat to world peace.  Why? Because of the human ego.  No one likes to be shown up or proven wrong.  No one likes to be devalued and demoralized compared to everyone else.  If the United States is right, and it has the power to enforce what it believes is right, but what it believes is right is wrong to people of other nations, those who do not agree with the United States will not sue or seek for peace.  Because of human nature, peace seems impossible. Most people would rather have the money, prestige, and popularity that support their personal ego rather than remain a “nobody” in the world.

What if a “nobody” had access to all of the information that the world’s nuclear physicists have, and have ever had, and this “nobody” wanted to make a name for himself and leave a sign and token of his existence so that no one would ever forget his name?

There was once a “nobody” who lived in Greece during the fifth century BCE. He was from a very wealthy family that everyone envied.  At that time, everyone wanted to be rich, and the Greek culture afforded people with reasonable opportunities to live the Greek Dream.  As this “nobody” grew, he wanted to be as popular and well liked as his father and others of his peers.  Because of his family’s wealth, he was able to sit around and think about things.  He could read and write.  He would sit around for days and read and study things. He developed a theory that became the basis of everything that modern nuclear physicists know and understand about nuclear energy: the atom.  His name was Democritus.

Democritus knew that if a stone were divided in half, the two halves would have essentially the same properties as the whole.  Therefore, he reasoned (theorized) that if the stone were to be continually cut into smaller and smaller pieces then, at some point, there would be a piece which would be so small as to be indivisible.  He called these small pieces of matter “atomos,” the Greek word for indivisible.

Over 2,000 years later, Democritus’ theory started the Nuclear Age. During the later part of the 19^th Century, other men sat around all day and thought about the atom and began to experiment with Democritus’ ideas.  It didn’t take more than 50 years for Democritus’ ancient theory to develop and lead to the detonation of the first nuclear weapon.  So, the question remains, why didn’t and couldn’t Democritus have taken the theoretical steps necessary to create nuclear weapons during the 5^th Century BCE? Why did it take over 2,000 more years before the theory was expounded upon?  If the ancient Greeks had developed nuclear weapons, there wouldn’t have been a Great Roman Empire.  There would have only been the Great Greek Empire, which would have spread throughout and conquered the entire world, but ONLY IF the Greeks would have used atomic energy and power for good.

There were those who lived in ancient Greece who knew where Democritus’ theory would lead.  These few men didn’t care about making a name for themselves.  They didn’t care about the money, the prestige, or the popularity among their peers.  They didn’t have any peers.  They were “nobodies.”  It was a humble servant and close friend of one of the most popular and influential Greeks in history, Aristotle, who would converse with his master and discuss the ramifications and possibilities of Democritus’ ideas.  Convinced of the bad that humanity would do with the atom, Aristotle rejected Democritus’ theory.  Because of Aristotle’s influence on education and science, nuclear physics would lay dormant and unconsidered for tens of hundreds of years.

It was because Aristotle’s servant didn’t sell the sign and token of his humanity for money and aggrandize his own ego in order to leave a name and legacy for himself that the world was saved at that time.  Had that humble person not existed, we might not have a world today.

There are many more “nobodies” in the world than “somebodies.”  If you walk around the world’s most populous cities, how many people do you recognize and know?  Very few, if any.  The ability of a “nobody” to become a “somebody” has diminished over time.  It takes a lot of “nobodies” to make a “somebody.” To be known for your wealth, you need a lot of “nobodies” making money for you. To gain prestige and popularity among your peers, there must exist a lot of “nobodies” to whom you are compared.

During the times of Ancient Greece, only the “somebodies” had the time and the means to read and write and theorize. Information was generally restricted only to the “somebodies.”  Not so today. Today, anybody can access most information.

It is not a nation attacking or threatening another nation with nuclear weapons that the world must fear.  We must fear a “nobody” wanting to become a “somebody.”  It is easy for governments and their law enforcement agencies to monitor and control people of whom they know and are aware.  It’s not so easy to monitor and control the “nobodies” of the world.

In a secure and isolated basement, with access to the information of nuclear physics, a “nobody” is devising a plan to become a “somebody.”

Just a few selected men created a nuclear device that was once deemed impossible by the majority of the world.  These few nuclear pioneers had access to very limited information compared to what more modern nuclear physicists have access to, much of which is available on the Internet.  This “nobody” will acquire the knowledge and ability to take all that the pioneers had and turn a wagon drawn by two oxen into a supersonic jet. And there’s nothing that any law enforcement agency on Earth can do to stop him.  There’s nothing that any law, any amount of vetting, waiting period, or background check is going to do to stop him.

If he succeeds and detonates a thermonuclear device that has 3000 times more power than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, how is the world going to react? What is it going to do?

It seems that when something like this happens, the world responds in fear and a strong resolve to never let it happen again by retaliating.  When the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001, by a group of “nobodies,” it responded with the full force of its military. The U.S. investigated, pursued, and killed anyone that it theorized had taken a part in the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Centers in New York. Tens of thousands of innocent men, women, and little ones became justifiable “collateral damage.”  The United States killed and wounded tens of hundreds of thousands of “nobodies” in retaliation.  The American people didn’t know the names, families, addresses, or anything else about these “nobodies.”  In March of 2003, the “shock and awe” military campaign of revenge began.

The “nobody” who is learning how to create a thermonuclear weapon in his basement doesn’t particularly like what the “somebodies” of this world have done, and are doing, to the “nobodies.”  He has learned a lot from the U.S. response to 9-11.  He has learned that he has to remain incognito and do what he is doing (developing a homemade thermonuclear weapon) under the radar of American intelligence and law enforcement.

When this “nobody” becomes a “somebody” in world history by destroying MILLIONS of innocent people as “collateral damage” during an attack on a legitimate target (the United States), which this “nobody” believes is responsible for creating misery and destroying “nobodies” like him throughout the world, how, then, will the world respond?  When this person succeeds at developing and detonating a homemade thermonuclear device that is 1000 times more powerful than the Tsar Bomba, in a suburb of Washington D.C., it will completely destroy Washington D.C., Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York City.

What or whom is the United States government going to attack in retaliation and response to this type of attack?  The United States government will no longer exist to organize its “well-regulated militia” and lead its military.  The Pentagon will be instantaneously vaporized.  Every atom of every government building, of every politician, of every military leader will do exactly what Democritus theorized would happen: be broken down into its smallest, non-dividable parts.

New York, the hub of the world’s economy, will no longer exist.  The American economy and government will remain in the hands of 300 million, unregulated American gun owners, who have no clue about what they are going to do next. Will they unite along left-wing and right-wing political lines?  Will the gun owners take over and force the liberals to reestablish a government according to the concepts presented in the United States Constitution, which would still, theoretically, be in effect in the other U.S. States that weren’t destroyed?  Will the gun owners kill the liberals who don’t believe that a citizen should have the right to own a gun outside of a “well-regulated militia,” as the liberals interpret the Constitution?

Perhaps, a well-established foreign government like China would take over. Chinese businesses are well invested in the United States and own many of the companies that will provide paychecks to the surviving Americans.  Wouldn’t the Chinese have a stake in what the United States will become after their political and economic structure is completely destroyed?

The gun owners would feel safer than the liberals.  They could defend themselves and their families.  But what about the millions of people who owned guns in the former States of Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York City?  What good did their guns do them?

If the world were to respond like it usually does—like the United States did after 9-11—the homemade nuclear explosion that will wipe out the American government and economic base will not be the last.  Eventually, a modern-day Democritus will no longer have to theorize how the sun was created, he will KNOW.  And unless this modern Democritus is stopped by the humanity of a humble servant—a “nobody” who will never sell the sign and token of his humanity for money, prestige, or popularity—our sun will be recreated in the isolated basement laboratory of an unknown “nobody.”  The creation of a new sun will destroy our solar system and put out the fire that allows humans to exist.

Streaming live over the Internet, this modern-day Democritus will give his final statement to a world that made him feel like a “nobody.”  Looking straight into the camera, with his finger on the key that will detonate a new sun’s creation, he will speak his last words: 

“If I am nobody, then so shall be the rest of you.”

The “nobodies” of this world now have access to everything and all the information that all the “somebodies” have had.  The “nobodies” will continue to use this access to become somebody.  To save humanity, we need to understand why anyone would get the idea in one’s head that one must kill other people in order to make a name for oneself, or for what “nobody” considers is justice.

We do not know who the next “nobody” is who wants to become “somebody.” Nikolas Cruz was a “nobody” before he entered his high school and killed a few of his classmates who looked at him as a “nobody.”

Theodore “Ted” Kaczynski, was a “nobody” until he decided to live in a cabin isolated away from others and put together bombs and mail them to people who he had decided were a part of an unjust world.  Kaczynski became somebody: the infamous Unabomber.  In his mind, he simply wanted a better world for everyone. Kaczynski wrote a manifesto about the inequality and disparity between the rich and poor of the world and the way that technology was destroying the earth’s environs.  He called his manifesto: “The Industrial Society and its Future.”  He sent the manifesto to the New York Times and told the popular newspaper that he would not bomb anyone else, if the Times published it.  His brother read the paper and recognized Ted’s writing style.  Once discovered, law enforcement officials surrounded Ted in his cabin.  Had Kaczynski developed the technology for a sun’s fusion reactor in his cabin, the unjust world that he observed, and the people responsible for it, would no longer exist.

A few “nobodies” got together and figured out a way to hijack planes and turn the planes into missiles to attack the economic center of the world that these “nobodies” were convinced was the main contributor to poverty and inequality in their own countries.  They sacrificed their own lives to become “somebody.”

To stop the next “nobody,” we need to focus on creating a world where everybody is somebody.

THumP® has the solutions.  No one else does.®

One of the questions most frequently asked about our “unchallenged” proposals to end worldwide poverty, end worldwide child prostitution, and help establish peace in the Middle East (three proposals of which we have produced a video explanation) is:

How are you going to pay for it?

People who ask this question do not understand world economics or the power and influence that the United States gained over world economics after World War II.  These are ignorant and misinformed about how the world’s economy actually works.

We’ve tried to explain it.  Maybe we will concentrate on making it clearer and more detailed in the future.  But the answer is simple and easy to understand if one takes some time to learn about economics:

These programs will be paid for in the same manner, by the same means, according to the same laws, that ended the Great Depression of the early 20th Century.

Study how the United States government, almost unilaterally (standing alone), ended the Great Depression that was affecting the entire world.

Understand that there has always been a National Debt when a society has used coined (or printed) money as a means of commerce in its economic system … ALWAYS.  This will never be avoided as long as people need a government to control them and establish laws for them.

The U.S. Founding Fathers, mostly successful business men, knew how an economy works.  This is why they set up the U.S. Constitution the way that they did.  The Constitution ostensibly gives the power to the people to coin as much money as the people need in order to engage in commerce.

It was the establishment of the United States Senate (2 Senators from each State) that corrupted the money system and tipped the balance of how money would serve the people towards the wealthy.  Originally, the Senators were “appointed,” not by the people, but by the wealthy, to serve the needs of the wealthy.

Always keep in mind that anything that has to do with money and economics can be blamed on the U.S. Congress.  Congress could authorize the coinage (printing) of enough money to pay off the National Debt tomorrow.  But if price controls and inflation limitations are not in place, those who make all the money by providing the goods and services to the people will raise their prices according to how much money is made available to the people.

Once the National Debt is paid, if Congress does not have a balanced budget, which is statistically impossible (in reality, it is impossible), the National Debt will still grow back to what it is today (yesterday, if Congress paid off the debt tomorrow.). This is how state-based economies work. 

The more that the masses (99%) are dependent upon the goods and services of others (supply and demand), the more control over the masses those have who actually provide the goods and services.

The following is a very important truth and something that the ignorant of our world, the youth of our world, the disenfranchised and underrepresented of our world (the 99%) do not seem to understand or accept:

If the 1% disappeared today, the world would be thrown into anarchy and chaos.  Who would continue to receive a paycheck?  Signed by whom?

We have spent hundreds of accumulated years studying economics. 

THumP®’s proposals will work.

THumP® has the solutions. No one else does.

The Humanity Party® condemns the blatant hypocrisy of “sanctuary cities” in the United States.

While there is no legal and proper definition for “sanctuary city,” generally speaking, it’s a city (or a county, or a state) that limits its cooperation with federal immigration enforcement agents in order to protect low-priority immigrants from deportation.

Let’s use San Francisco, California, for one of our examples.  (NOTE: California has touted itself as a “Sanctuary State.”)

San Francisco’s economy would tank without “illegal” immigrants.  

San Francisco raised the minimum wage to $15 per hour … for “LEGAL” citizens.  It turns a blind eye to many businesses that hire mostly “illegal” immigrants whom business owners are not forced by their own laws to pay $15 per hour.  “Illegals” are paid whatever business owners want … off the books.

Let’s suppose that every worker, legal or not, in San Francisco makes at least $15 per hour.  It would take at least 10 people making $15 per hour to properly afford a two-bedroom apartment in San Francisco.  When wages go up, rents go up.  There are some outdated rent controls in San Francisco, but only for “legal” residents.

In the most recent San Francisco Magazine, starting on page 80, there is a story about Virgilio Alvaro-Arcos, an illegal immigrant facing deportation, who pro-bono attorneys are trying to help wade through San Francisco’s liberal immigration laws.  Virgilio’s only desire was to come to the United States to work.  Once in San Francisco, he shared a studio apartment “with 31 other desperate men, where he paid $140 per month to sleep under a table.”  This is typical of many immigrants seeking employment in these “sanctuary cities.”

This is not a sanctuary for these desperate people wanting to work anywhere, doing anything, so that they can support their families back in Mexico, or their “illegal” families living in the United States.  These cities are SLAVE CITIES.  These cities tout their humanity and liberal attitude towards immigrating humans while subjecting these people to impossible-to-afford rents, forcing them to crowd into small apartments.  These cities tout their humanity by allowing business owners to take advantage of the “non-citizen” status of these desperate human beings, enriching business owners.

Virgilio sits in a California jail awaiting deportation.  The woman and her children, whom Virgilio was supporting, lost his support and are suffering.  But does San Francisco really care?  There are many other “Virgilios” desperately finding their way to these protected SLAVE CITIES.  There are 10 “illegals” to take the place of each one who is arrested and deported.

Virgilio will get deported.  He will find himself back in Chiapas, Mexico, where there are no jobs, no way to earn a living … except one: drugs.  If he has to sneak across the U.S. border anyway, why not load himself up with drugs and get paid for sneaking across the border?  No wall will work.  It’s not hard to tunnel under a wall.

But what if there were no border to illegally cross?  What if drugs were decriminalized and widely available to those who abuse them without fear of punishment or reprisal, like alcohol is?  What if there were free clinics, of means and support, for drug users, who will get the drugs illegally anyway?

Virgilio’s first choice was to sneak into the United States and do the menial jobs that most Americans don’t want to do.  If forced back to Mexico, where there are no jobs, why wouldn’t getting involved in the drug trade be something that Virgilio would consider?  But if there were no illegal border crossings, and Virgilio could come and go as he pleased … and what pleased him was to work the jobs that Americans don’t want to do … why shouldn’t he be allowed free access to these jobs?

California’s economy would significantly falter without illegal immigrants.  The San Francisco Magazine article expounded on the efforts being made by some sympathetic lawyers who are trying to defend the right of San Francisco to maintain its sanctuary status.  It makes these young attorneys feel good about themselves, about the law that they are sworn to uphold and protect.  But what are they actually accomplishing in freeing a detained “illegal”?  While rotting in jail is certainly not preferable, is sharing a studio apartment with 30 other desperate men and being treated like an “illegal” more preferable?

If The Humanity Party® was in power, we would open the borders and give each human being a Debit Card with voucher credits for food, clothing, housing, healthcare and education.  The voucher credits would not only be good in American stores and by American providers, but they would be good anywhere in the world … even in Chiapas, Mexico.  If Virgilio and his family had access to these cash-redeemable vouchers, wouldn’t a local economic infrastructure result by companies setting up business in Chiapas in order to provide Virgilio and his family with the goods and services provided for by the voucher credits?

Why, then, would Virgilio work for an illegal drug cartel where he might be killed or have to kill?  Because his family’s basic necessities are provided for, but not a computer, television, or phone, Virgilio would make himself available to work at one of the new Chiapas businesses set up to provide the goods and services that the HumanECard™ provides.

Virgilio wouldn’t have any desire to immigrate to the United States.

Virgilio wouldn’t be a slave.

Virgilio would be a human being.

THumP® has the solutions.  No one else does.

… Freedom of Assembly (to defend a lie).

The Right to Bear Arms (to kill for a lie).

As Americans, we are granted the right and protection by our Constitution … to lie.

Consider, for example, a journalist who claims to have a “source” that the journalist will not divulge.  Without revealing the source so that the source can be cross-examined and deposed, how can what the journalist writes as a result of the information gained from the source be trusted?  What if the journalist’s source is lying?  What if there really is no source at all and the journalist made one up in order to give more validity to the journalist’s own personal opinion?  (This happens more than we would like to acknowledge.)

Consider religion.  

Someone must be lying when one religious leader claims that God speaks only to him or her and to no one else.  If God is the source of religion, then there must be a multitude of disagreeing gods perpetuating their own religion.  Like journalists, religious leaders maintain that their source of truth cannot be divulged or revealed to be cross-examined and deposed.  Instead of calling the person from whom religious leaders receive their information a “source,” religious leaders call their source, “God.”  Who can depose God? 

Religious leaders, similar to journalists, maintain and protect the anonymity of the source of their information.  Only religious leaders and journalists know the real “source” of their information.

How many lives have been ruined by journalists and religious leaders who use their freedoms to defame and persecute one who does not believe in their information?  

How many lies have been invented and spread because people have the freedom to say and publish whatever they want, about anyone they want?  

How many innocent lives have been destroyed by the freedom of the press to report one’s arrest and criminal charge before the person has been granted their due process of law?  

Through the due process of law, an unnamed or unavailable-to-cross-exam “source” cannot be a witness at trial.  Any information gained from an unnamed  “source” is not admissible during the proper due process of law.  

Before the accused is legally deemed convicted, their reputation and personal life has already been destroyed by the Freedom of the Press, regardless of whether or not journalists use the word “alleged.”

Consider the Salem witch trials of the late 17th Century.  We know that there are no such things as witches … well, the prudent of us know this, but a journalist at that time had their source, and the religious leaders at that time had theirs.  Innocent women were murdered because of a lie, both in what was reported and what the religious leaders believed their god wanted done to witches.  This god killed innocent women.  The journalists working for God, who wrote the Bible, justified these cruel murders.

Consider the motto and coat of arms of the most prestigious college in the United States: Harvard University.

“Veritas” is Latin for “truth.” The university was founded and established by religious leaders who used the Bible as the source of their truth.  Harvard was not established and founded on veritas.  It was established on the Bible.  

Harvard is America’s oldest university.  It is the home of the first printing press.  It is where journalists were first trained and given the value and prestige that they needed in order to have their information considered as more veritas than another’s.  

The information found in every one of Harvard’s multi-million number of books is a personal opinion of the book’s author … of a journalist.  NONE of this information can be used in a court of law as evidence in any matter of law.  Everything that any Harvard student learns can be disputed and argued.  

There are all kinds of Latin phrases engraved on the buildings throughout Harvard’s campus, but the founders missed one … an important one.  In the middle of the campus, in front of its most prestigious library, in the middle of Harvard Yard, there should be a large memorial of granite erected to the mythical Christian Apostle Paul holding a Bible.  

If Harvard’s motto, Veritas, was upheld and truthful, the memorial’s Bible’s inscription would read in large, unmistakeable words: 

Semper Discentes et Numquam ad Scientiam Veritatis Pervenientes

We will let the tens of thousands of Harvard’s graduates translate this meaning.

The Humanity Party® proclaims that the United States Constitution, although at the time it was written it might have been the best government constitution the world had ever known, (and this isn’t saying much at that time), is a corrupt document of inhumane laws that needs to be completely rewritten to conform to a modern world and a more humane and equitable system of law and order.

To reign in the abuses of Freedom of Speech, of Religion, of the Press, and of Assembly, (the right to lie), and the system of law controlled by lawyers and judges that one cannot afford, we propose the following modification: 

Article IV - Inalienable Human Rights

Section 6 – Right to Personal Information Privacy

1. Right to Privacy. Each person shall have the right to privacy of their personal information, except information that is deemed necessary in the enforcement of the laws provided by this Constitution or for the protection of the people of the Republic.
2. Publication of Individual Personal Information. Each person’s individual information, of any event concerning that person in the past, of any event about that person occurring in the present, or of any event in which the person shall participate in the future, shall be protected from publication in any media source, including the Internet, unless that person, of that person’s free will and choice, or by Court order in protection of the public interest, grants permission to the access and publication of such information.
3. Database of Personal Information for Law Enforcement. Law enforcement agencies shall be restricted in the publication of a person’s personal information to a database specifically designed for the protection of the people of this Republic and this Constitution.

Section 7 – Right of Belief, Expression, and the Media

1. Right of Belief. Congress shall establish laws that protect each person’s right to act, to be acted upon, to believe, and to express opinion, where that action, belief or expression of opinion does not affect, extend upon, to, or impede another person’s right to act, to be acted upon, to believe, or to express opinion.
2. Right of the Press (Media). Congress shall make no law infringing upon the right of the Press (Media) to publish beliefs, opinions, expressions, or any other matter suitable to the purposes for which Media exists, except those that protect personal information according to Section 6 of this Article.

Section 8 – Right to Property

1. Personal Belongings. Except for those belongings specifically prohibited by this Constitution, Congress shall enact and support laws that protect a person’s right to hold personal property of any kind, and enjoy the benefits thereof, where that personal property does not obstruct, abuse, abate, or in any other way impede the right of another to hold personal property and enjoy the benefits thereof.
2. Search and Seizure. Congress shall make no law that permits the search and seizure of personal property, unless by such prohibition, the life, liberty, or personal property of another is threatened in any way, at any time.

Section 9 – Due Process of Law

1. Right to Self-Representation. Congress shall establish laws that guarantee each person equal due process of law, including the right to self-representation (pro se).  A person shall have the right to self-representation in any Court of law where that representation is determined to be just, reasonable, or an application for redress or relief that is reasonably established by the Petitioner for any violation of Constitutional law.
2. Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure. Congress shall establish Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure that favor and support the right to self-representation.
3. Counsel for Pro Se Litigants. Each Court shall provide a legal staff of bailiffs, clerks, and officers (attorneys) to support self-representation.  Each court shall establish and promote efficient Rules of Procedure and due process.  The Court shall provide a civil pro se litigant up to 2 hours of counsel prior to the hearing of the petition and during the time allotted by the Court for the hearing.  The Court shall provide criminal pro se litigants unlimited, reasonable counsel.
4. Payment of Court Costs in Civil Matters. In any Civil matter, if the Court rules in favor of the Respondent, the Petitioner shall pay the Court’s costs and fees, including those fees of the Court-appointed attorneys assisting the Respondent, or the Respondent’s own attorney, and any punitive damages granted to the Respondent. If the Court rules in favor of the Plaintiff, that person or entity shall pay its own costs and fees, but not those of the Respondent or of the Court.
5. Payment of Court Costs in Criminal Matters.  The Court shall pay all costs incurred by its proceedings in any Criminal matter.
6. Determination of Civil Matters. All Civil matters shall be determined by trial by the Court in which the matter is heard.
7. Determination of Criminal Matters. All Criminal matters shall be determined by a trial by Jury, where the Defendant, in all cases, shall be guaranteed the reasonable right and ability to participate in selecting the Jury.
8. Rights of the Innocent Until Proven Guilty—Bail Guidelines. When charged with any criminal offense, and until that person has been provided the benefits of due process of law and found guilty of the alleged crime, that person shall be presumed and treated as if that person is not guilty; which includes, but is not limited to, liberty from incarceration and the necessity of posting bail.  Unless indisputable evidence has been obtained, verified, and accepted by the Court against a person charged with a crime of violence against another person or another person’s property, no person shall be held by bond, unless or until that person fails to appear at the Court-appointed times scheduled for that person by the Court or law enforcement officials.

This is a framed mirror.  

This is THumP®’s portrait of a mass shooter, of a killer, of a murderer, of a shooting victim involved in a suicide.  

At any time, in the same circumstance of emotional imbalance and despair, any one of us could be in this portrait.

THumP® has outlined its official response to the recent American mass shootings and our stance on gun control.  (Here is a link to this response.)  

Here are a few of the main points of our response:

There will be no effect on gun violence until there are rational changes made to American law and order.

 …

We do not believe that government should force the American people to give up their guns.  We need the right form of government that can prove to the people that its “well-regulated militia” can do the job better, safer, and more efficiently than unregulated gun owners.  Only when the people are convinced that the government is able, will they feel safe enough to trust a government controlled “well-regulated militia.”

Therefore, THumP®’s first course of action is to establish a type of government in which the American people can trust, in which the rest of the world can trust.  Only then can people be influenced to give up their possession and use of guns. 

Furthermore, we acknowledge that most gun deaths are a cause of suicide. When people lose hope, they lose their desire to live.  We insist that if the right form of government existed in which people could hope for a better world, less would want to end their life. 

…

Our patience comes from our hope that people will consider many of the underlying causes of violence against oneself or against others.  Economic and social inequality is one of the root causes of desperate, hopeless acts of violence.  Another one, just as important, is emotional inequality, where one feels less valued than others.

We have outlined our platform and presented our plan to give hope to people through economic and social changes, as well as personal self-worth and value.  A strong, righteous government that is not self-serving can provide relief from the pressures of hopelessness and worthlessness. 

…

We ask people to please consider our proposals for the right form of government first.  Keep your guns and back our proposals.  Once we have proven to the people that the right form of government is one in which a person can hope, and we can prove that this government’s “well-regulated militia” can indeed provide safety and freedom to the people, then we hope that people everywhere will put down their guns and support human equality and a unification of the world.

“Hope” is the intrinsic measure of our humanity, or better, that which we feel can be possible in spite of the improbabilities that seem to be part of our present experience.

It is improbable that we can convince American gun owners to put down their guns, but if we do not try something different that demonstrates a measure of our shared humanity, that we feel can be possible, then there is no hope.

We all share the same humanity.  None of us started out in life as one who would kill another person, or our self.  So, what makes us become a killer?  

What would we find out if we had the patience and took the time to get to know the perpetrators who take others’ lives, or their own?  What happened that caused the moment of emotional imbalance when each decided to take the lives of other people, many of whom, in most situations, the perpetrators didn’t personally know?

Society doesn’t seem interested in WHY a person decides to kill others.  Once a person makes the choice, the person is no longer seen as human.  Society and the media brand them as “perpetrators,” “killers,” “terrorists,” “monsters,” or “mentally ill,” to name a few of the inhumane names given to these human beings.

It will not make a difference whether the U.S. passes stricter gun laws or takes away all the guns from people outside of a “well-regulated militia” (see and read the entire 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution).  A knife is a weapon.  A rock is a weapon.  And a properly aimed vehicle can take many more lives than any gun can, even quicker.  Take away all guns and we will witness an emotionally imbalanced human use a vehicle to mow down tens of innocent school children as they walk in crosswalks, to their school bus, or down the street to their own homes.   

These types of seemingly senseless violent acts will not end until, unless, we learn WHY human beings become emotionally imbalanced.  

Many will say that all of us have personal problems, that all of us have experienced the unfairness of life, but that few of us would kill an innocent person.  Can any of us honestly claim that we have had the same experiences, of whatever kind, that the perpetrators had?  Have we walked in their shoes?  Have we experienced life as they have experienced it?

It is The Humanity Party®’s claim that all of us (the world) have contributed to these mass shootings and to the increase in instances of suicide.  

Suicide holds the highest rate of death by a gun.

New York Times reports:

“When Americans think about deaths from guns, we tend to focus on homicides.  But the problem of gun suicide is inescapable: More than 60 percent of people in this country who die from guns die by suicide.

“Suicide gets a lot less attention than murders for a few reasons.  One big one is that news organizations generally don’t cover suicides the way they do murders.  There’s evidence that news attention around suicide can lead to more suicides.  Suicide is more stigmatized and less discussed than homicide.

“But, as a matter of public health, gun suicides are a huge problem in the United States.  Suicide is the second-most common cause of death for Americans between 15 and 34, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Across all ages, it is the 10th-most common cause of death, and caused 1.6 percent of all deaths in 2012.

“Not all of those suicides are by gun, but a majority are.  And while some people feeling suicidal impulses will choose another method if a gun is not at hand, public health researchers cite two reasons guns are particularly dangerous: 1) Guns are more lethal than most other methods people try, so someone who attempts suicide another way is more likely to survive; 2) Studies suggest that suicide attempts often occur shortly after people decide to kill themselves, so people with deadly means at hand when the impulse strikes are more likely to use them than those who have to wait or plan.

“That means that strategies that make suicide more inconvenient or difficult can save lives.  Guns, when they are in the home, can make self-harm both easy and deadly.”

It is our position that a child’s upbringing, culture, religion, and other societal pressures heavily contribute to suicide.  

Take for example, a child who colors outside of the lines with crayons and says, “Look how pretty, mommy!”  

A loving mother responds with caring platitudes of adoration and appropriate accolades.  The child’s coloring is proudly taped on the refrigerator for the rest of the family and others to see.  The child’s art is loved and praised, but later, if the grown child shows no natural artistic ability and shows their work to the world, the world rejects the person because the person draws “outside of the lines.”  Where the child could once do no wrong, and no matter what the child did, the child received praise and acceptance, the world does not treat the aged child as the child was emotionally foundationalized.  

The alignment of a child’s emotional balance begins from infancy.  Children do not learn how to fail.  Parents, teachers, the world, do not teach children that failure is okay.  Children learn that failure is not an option.  The aged child only receives worldly value and acceptance when the person meets the world’s conditions of value and success.  

The child is loved, supported, fed, clothed, housed and cared for when sick or when emotional pain is experienced, but once the child reaches the age that the world has determined is adulthood, the child is thrown into a world of inequality and of forced economic livelihood (you either work like everyone else has to or you die.)

In the real world … in the adult world … no one cares about the child’s “out of the lines coloring.”  Unless the aged child submits their free will to the enslavement of employment, they will have no money, and no one is going to clothe, feed, house, and provide health and mental care for them as their parents did.  

The child loses an extreme amount of emotional self-worth and value to the world once the child becomes an adult.  The child must forget about everything that the child did to find personal happiness in life from the personal freedom enjoyed as child, liberty that is ripped away when one becomes an adult.

Besides economic struggle and inequality, the self-worth and value that a child receives from established emotional anchors of religion and the prejudiced teachings learned from parents, are threatened as an adult.  In the real world: Everyone is right. Which makes everyone wrong. ™️

If we base our individual self-worth and value on our personal right, and another tells us we are wrong, we naturally respond in self-defense.  And so many times throughout our shared history this self-defense results in killing through murder and war.  

Why can’t we have a world where everyone is right?  Why can’t we teach our children that everyone has their own version of right; that the version taught to the child is pertinent and relevant to the child only; that every other child has the right to be right and protected and supported in this individual right?  We do not teach this to our children because it threatens our own emotional anchors of, I am right and everyone else is wrong.

We have a world where no one really cares about anyone outside of their circle of loved ones and friends.  We stand in this circle, protected, praised, and supported.  The circle has replaced our parents and the security of our childhood home life.  Few dare to step out of this circle because once one steps out of the circle, and if one does not step into a new circle, the one feels lost, unloved, valueless, and hopeless.  Why wouldn’t one take their own life and end this emotional pain and suffering?

The above things are about suicide.  What about mass shooters?  Why do they do what they do?

To explain why we will use a real-life scenario: 

The Humanity Party® has become the only supporter of, and we also could have provided a caring circle of humanity that could have surrounded a human being who lived by the name, Thomas Hamilton.

In March of 1996, Thomas walked into a Primary School in Scotland and killed 16 innocent children under the age of 8.  He killed their teacher, then himself.

Why?

Thomas Hamilton isn’t around any longer to tell the world why, but we know why.  

Here is why:

Thomas loved children.  He was the Director of a few local youth clubs.  He was the leader of a local Scout group of young boys.

“Thomas Watt Hamilton was born on May 10, 1952, in Glasgow, Scotland.  His mother, a hotel chambermaid, was divorced from his father by the time Hamilton was born.  Hamilton never knew his father and grew up with his mother’s adoptive parents, believing they were his biological parents.  They legally adopted him at age 2.  He also thought his biological mother was his sister until he was told the truth when he was 22 years old.”

A loner, Hamilton never formed any close relationships with adults of either sex and seemed particularly uncomfortable around women.  Can one imagine why?  If you were brought up to believe your grandparents were your parents and your mother was your sister, wouldn’t your view of normal relationships be affected?

There had been several complaints to police regarding Hamilton’s behavior towards the young boys who attended the youth clubs he directed. Claims had been made of his having taken photographs of semi-naked boys without parental consent.  The entire local community was suspicious of his moral intentions towards boys.

Thomas was never arrested, charged, or convicted of ANY immoral act or behavior towards any boy, of any age, but the people spread their rumors.  The police did their investigations.  The world took away the only thing that gave Thomas self-worth and value: his ability to be involved with and help young boys.

Thomas Watt Hamilton took from that local community what it had taken from him.

How many lives have been destroyed because of rumor?  How many lives have been destroyed because of the unregulated freedom of the press?  How many innocent people have been arrested and charged with a crime that they did not commit, but had their name blasted in the media as the “alleged” perpetrator without being given the due process of law that Americans tout is part of their inalienable rights?  Rumor, gossip, and the sensationalized media reports generated by unscrupulous journalists are a gross representation of what our humanity has become.

Let’s consider the more recent mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the United States:

In December of 2012, Adam Lanza outdid Thomas Hamilton and killed 20 children under the age of 8 and 6 teachers.

Why?

No one has ever investigated and reported why. 

Why?  

Because an honest investigative journalist would be crucified by his or her peers and blacklisted from journalism if he or she investigated and wrote a story about the human being … not the killer, not the monster, but the human being … named Adam Lanza. No media outlet in this world would dare publish an honest and thorough exposé of the real life of Adam Lanza and what was really going through his head when he decided to kill 20 innocent children and 6 innocent aged children.

The Humanity Party® has done its homework.  We are not afraid to tell the real truth.  We are not afraid to report it.  We know that only if we start to understand why, can we begin to find a solution to, not only mass shootings, but the increasing number of suicides.

Here is some of what the world believes and is taught about Adam Lanza:

“Lanza attended Sandy Hook Elementary School for four and a half years.  He started at Newtown Middle School in 2004 but according to his mother, Nancy, he was ‘wracked by anxiety’.  His mother told friends her son started getting upset at middle school because of frequent classroom changes during the day.  The movement and noise was too stimulating and made him anxious.  At one point his anxiety was so intense, his mother took him to the emergency room at Danbury Hospital. In April 2005, she moved him to a new school, St. Rose of Lima, where he lasted only eight weeks.

“At age 14, he went to Newtown High School, where he was named to the honor roll in 2007.  Students and teachers who knew him in high school described Lanza as ‘intelligent, but nervous and fidgety’.  He avoided attracting attention and was uncomfortable socializing.  He is not known to have had any close friends in school.  Schoolwork often triggered his underlying sense of hopelessness and by 2008, when Adam turned sixteen he was only going to school occasionally.  The intense anxiety Lanza experienced at the time suggests his autism was exacerbated by the hormonal shifts of adolescence.  He was taken out of high school and home-schooled by his mother and father.  He earned a GED.  In 2008 and 2009, he also attended some classes at Western Connecticut State University.”

Some of the clues to the real truth about Adam Lanza are in what the world believes about him, but the world does not want to see Adam as a good, caring human being.  The world wants Adam remembered as a monster, as a killer, as a mass shooter, as mentally insane.  

The real truth: Adam did not want the children to suffer through the same educational process that he did.  This is the only reason why he killed them … to save them from the world that had abused him.

The Humanity Party® doesn’t want anyone to suffer through the same social and political processes that can change any one of us from a human being into a monster.

We are our biggest problem.

THumP® has the solutions.  No one else does.   

NOTICE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE:

We hope that you will read and share this.

There will be no effect on gun violence until there are rational changes made to American law and order.

THumP® supports the U.S. Constitution as it is written.  We do not solicit changing the current Constitution except by the rules set forth therein.  A 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress can legally change, amend, or rewrite the Constitution to reflect more modern ideals and solve many of our social problems.

We call upon the American people to vote in every election.  Until we have found credible candidates who will represent our platform with courage, instead of selecting any proposed candidate at the ballot box, we encourage voters to write in: The Humanity Party.  This will send a strong message to the government, regardless of who is elected.

It is our hope that our message will reach the American people.  

Our message is one of hope, peace, and unity.  We do not condone or organize protests or movements that disrupt peace.  We know that change can come through the law and order that is currently established through the election process.  However, we know that the major two-party system cannot, will not, accomplish the rational changes that need to be made.

Here is our position on gun control:

We support the U.S. Constitution and its 2nd Amendment AS IT IS WRITTEN, for the purpose for which it was written.

No citizen, outside of a “well-regulated militia” should be able to own a gun for personal protection, unless that protection is against natural predators at locations where such protection is needed.

That said,

We do not believe that government should force the American people to give up their guns.  We need the right form of government that can prove to the people that its “well-regulated militia” can do the job better, safer, and more efficiently than unregulated gun owners.  Only when the people are convinced that the government is able, will they feel safe enough to trust a government controlled “well-regulated militia.”

Therefore, THumP®’s first course of action is to establish a type of government in which the American people can trust, in which the rest of the world can trust.  Only then can people be influenced to give up their possession and use of guns.

Furthermore, we acknowledge that most gun deaths are a cause of suicide.  When people lose hope, they lose their desire to live.  We insist that if the right form of government existed in which people could hope for a better world, less would want to end their life.

We have researched and found the true motive behind the terrible Las Vegas massacre in October 2017.   Although we do not condone the way that the shooter made his point, our information has provided substantial evidence that he did what he did and sacrificed his own life to make a strong point about the need for gun control.

We strongly encourage those who follow The Humanity Party® to immediately report anyone who speaks of making a stand for gun control by sacrificing their life in taking other lives.  This is not the way to spark change.  Violence begets violence.  It always has; it always will.

Our patience comes from our hope that people will consider many of the underlying causes of violence against oneself or against others.  Economic and social inequality is one of the root causes of desperate, hopeless acts of violence.  Another one, just as important, is emotional inequality, where one feels less valued than others.

We have outlined our platform and presented our plan to give hope to people through economic and social changes, as well as personal self-worth and value.  A strong, righteous government that is not self-serving can provide relief from the pressures of hopelessness and worthlessness.

Please carefully review our Proposed Constitution at our website: http://humanityparty.com/proposed-constitution.html

In order to prove to the people that a new government is all that is needed to properly protect and keep people safe, we recommend these initial changes:

We need more law enforcement officers who are well trained and well paid - as the first part of the 2nd Amendment implies: “well-regulated.”

We need to eliminate cash from all financial transactions.  This will greatly reduce criminal activity where cash is the main source of trade.  No gun or its ammunition can be sold or transferred without a regulatory fiduciary overseeing these transactions.

We call upon Congress to pass laws that support the 2nd Amendment as it is written.  We propose that the United States consider the gun control laws implemented by the State of Israel.  

No person should be able to own a gun or buy ammunition unless that person receives a license.  The law should put strict “well-regulated” restrictions on private gun ownership, allowing each person who is awarded a license to own only one hand gun, and no automatic weapons of any kind.  Ammunition should be limited and extensively tracked.  Every purchase should be properly recorded and tracked.

According to an investigative report published in the New York Post:

“Israel limits gun permits to people who meet strict requirements of residency, occupation, or army rank.

"Forty percent of all gun permit applicants are flat-out rejected by the Israeli government.

"Gun owners must renew their permits every year and immediately report any change of eligibility status to the Israeli federal government.

"Israel relies on professional members of the military and police force for security, rather than ‘good guys with guns’ or even Civil Guard volunteers.”

Israel is located in one of the most violent locations on Earth.  Threats to the State of Israel are constant and repetitive, but Israeli citizens are safer than most other places in the world, including the United States.  Why?  It has a “well-regulated militia.”  It was not “good guys with guns” that helped Israel win its wars.  It was a “well-regulated militia.”

We only use Israel as an example.  The Humanity Party® does not endorse or support any country, nation, or people who believes that their religious beliefs are more right or that place them above others.  We call on Israel and the United States to concentrate on bringing economic and social equality to the disputed parts of that nation, to the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.  We do not endorse or encourage any type of violence in response to human suffering.  If The Humanity Party® were in power, our first priority in that part of the world would be to initiate economic aid and policies that address human suffering in these disputed territories.

We have experienced considerable pushback to our proposal to enforce strict gun control, even making it illegal for anyone outside of a “well-regulated militia” (law enforcement and military) to own a gun except for sport and predator protection.

We ask people to please consider our proposals for the right form of government first.  Keep your guns and back our proposals.  Once we have proven to the people that the right form of government is one in which a person can hope, and we can prove that this government’s “well-regulated militia” can indeed provide safety and freedom to the people, then we hope that people everywhere will put down their guns and support human equality and a unification of the world.

“Hope” is the intrinsic measure of our humanity, or better, that which we feel can be possible in spite of the improbabilities that seem to be part of our present experience.

It is improbable that we can convince American gun owners to put down their guns, but if we do not try something different that demonstrates a measure of our shared humanity, that we feel can be possible, then there is no hope.

THumP® has the solutions.  No one else does.

humanityparty.com