L5TJXG: Hover/mouse-over: Use of this site —by DestinyArchitect

  1. L5U1B1: WELCOME! ☺  This site promotes & pioneers Social-technology™ based on science & love (Rules for Love so Love Rules™ and Humans, Play-God wisely™). This site is for anyone caring about romance, friends, love, family, community, getting along, playing & working together, social & work relations & relationships, values/morals/ethics/religion, and social issues between life-forms and especially between us humans! In fact, per "What's life worth without others to truly share it with?", this site encourages us to take our social aspects (indeed our Social-technology™) more seriously than we take our ever-dominating technical-technology! This site is “created & owned & copyright © by DestinyArchitect with all rights reserved, including no copying & no printing unless noted, except: • the latest version is available for free for public reading & comment at any time” at http://LoveRules.Info.
     
  2. L5N5LD: What are these codes such as “L5N5LD” on (the right-top of) this paragraph? They are my invention, part of next-generation Wikipedia I'm architecting. Each is an ID to uniquely & permanently name, point-to, link-to, find, and timestamp most anything:
     
    1. L5TM6L: Each gives a unique & permanent ID to most-every paragraph, section, & document. And many are also an HTML-anchor to the item (to the start of that item within the web page it's on); for instance, the URL ending with “#L5TM6L” (click it!) sends you this paragraph.
      L6SVUW: How to find an ID, say if a link containing an ID is broken: Find the ID (it could be in the name of the reference/link as “L5TM6L: ...”, or in the URL bookmark as “...#L5TM6L”, or in the URL filename as “.../l5tm6l.html...”) then just search for it (in these cases, search for “L5TM6L”): if you know it's a place is within the present web page, use your web browser's find (Ctrl-F); otherwise use say Google Search (yes, you can find the item even if it has been renamed and/or moved to another website!).
       
    2. L5TM9Q: Each is also a timestamp, encoding the date & time of the ID's creation which typically tells when its item was first spoken/written/created: I will be publishing a decoder.

KVDSDD(Persuading especially the masses)

Revision 185 -2009.12.28pst1550 (~10% complete 1st draft):

  1. KVDTBR:  Key motivation: 
    1. KVDU89:  This site http://LoveRules.Info pioneers social-technology™ as it's 1st mission.
    2. KVDU9M:  And any invention, beliefs, & technology, most especially social-technology™, will not be used without persuading users to use it.
      1. KVDUOG:  Also Persuading well is especially true today with social-technology™:
        1. KVDUYT:  it is getting increasingly easily to persuade humans to use a new cell phone, a new vehicle, or even change their communication habits, even if this will potentially make them incompatible with others (as both users need a fax device to transmit by fax; but that was still overcome, done, and now is increasingly outdated!); and the makers of these devices invent them, advertise them to us, and for the most part we switch when we tell us ("Okay, what's the latest cell phone I need to be using this year?").
        2. KVDV0O:  But getting people to update their dating & marriage habits, and especially their religion, typically near impossible, and seemingly impossible if you direct them in these choices (easily could inspire revolt).  
      2. KVDU9V:  Mass persuasion needed: Moreover, while individuals can change socially, social changes (as much social-technology™) typically needs to be compatible with (and usually the same as) that of other socially neighboring creatures, especially with humans being social creatures, creating a catch-22 of "I will do it if most everyone else does".
    3. KVDUJ8:  Thus social change (as most social-technology™) typically cannot be be accomplished significantly without persuading the masses, especially with social creatures as humans.

  2. KVDYNP:  Persuading the individual:
    1. KVDZ0M:  Conscious persuasion
      1. KVDZAI:  To be written@@@
      2. KVDZAA:  see Message composed of 2 parts
    2. KVDYWY:  Subconscious reprogramming
      1. KVDYU4:  Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)
      2. KVDYWY:  Hypnosis
      3. KVDYY6:  Subliminal Advertising
  3. KVDZ2I:  Persuading the masses
    1. KVDZ3A:  See motivation.
    2. KVDV6D:  The common sentiment "I will do it if most everyone else does"
      1. KVDV75:  Motivated by a combination of:
        1. KVDUEE:  Being perfectly (as "it" may simply not work or be fair unless most everybody does it) and
          1. KVDUG4:  Just simple social creature nature & nurture (and remember:
          2. KVDUCG:  While humans have regular exceptions they love to celebrate (which makes the movie, book, or news), the truth is humans are heard-like if not sheepish most of the time (>90%)).
    3.  
  4. KVDVER:  Some background material
    1. KVDVFF:  Presented on C-Span2 presentation of the American University (American.Edu)'s "Campaign Management Institute" (27th year) 2009.12.28pst12--
      1. KVDVIY:  David Winston: 2009.12.28pst1100-1200~ "Campaign Strategies & Messages" presentation by David Winston, Winston Group (Political Consulting Firm) - President
        1. KVDYF0:  Watched elections like some guys watch football.
        2. KVDY4J:  Message composed of 2 parts:
          1. KVDWTA:  Content is king: receivers need to interested (almost always already), message must be made graspable (as simple), and it must engage with a personal consequence to the receiver
            1. KVDXJ7:  People's interest/memory
              1. KVDXJV:  What: jarring events (as 9/11) (also popular events (of course), recent events), things which personally affect them
              2. KVDWZM:  Rarely works to persuade people to be interested in something they're not (like trying to speak slowly to someone-as-if-a-child to someone who just doesn't speak English)
              3. KVDXZL:  Note after one message gets out, reach an equilibrium when it's time for another message.
            2. KVDX07:  Make the message graspable.  Recommended 2 books: "Made to Stick" ("Why some ideas survive and others die") and "Laws of Simplicity"
            3. KVDXRY:  Engages: "Means-Ends Theory Communication": Issue Attributes -> Issue Benefit -> Personal Consequence -> Value emphasize
            4. KVDXQI:  Showed an impressive AT&T video ad in the mid 90s selling women on using cell phones (prior women just thought of them as "boy toys"); features Cindy Lopper's "The phone rings ... Girls just want to have fun!"
          2. KVDY5X:  Style also important.
        3. KVDXEV:  Knowing & responding correctly to opposition is key
          1. KVDXBZ:  Compare: Show how the opposition's plan won't work but yours will.
          2. KVDXD9:  Simply buying double the ads or negative ads against the opposition usually doesn't work well.
        4. KVDX26:  Balance Strategy & Tactics
          1. KVDX2Z:  "Strategy without tactics is the longest victory and Tactics without strategy is the noise before the upcoming defeat."
        5. KVDYJT:  Constantly doing decision loop (Observe, Assess, Decide, Act, repeat) very fast (often the faster the better).
        6. KVDWSU:  "Money is a resource, not an outcome" "the outcome is not how much money you raise, but if you win the election"   Gave many cases of where with the candidate with much money did poorly and without much money did well (Sen McCain went thru both).
      2. KVDVJU:  Stephan Hankin: 2009.12.28pst1308-1330~: presentation of "Polling/Public Opinion Research" by Stephan Hankin, Lincoln Park Strategies (Democratic Polling firm) - Founder & President
        1. KVDWHI:  Had done polling for 10 years, for campaigns as big as Obama; recently started his own company (Lincoln Park)
        2. KVDWH0:  Costs
          1. KVDVOK:  10 to 15% of campaign budget should be spent on (market) research
          2. KVDW6K:  A statewide campaign should spend at least $100K on "market research"
        3. KVDVPK:  Market research consists of these activities:
          1. KVDVVU:  Opinion Polls
            1. KVDZF6:  Start with easy questions (people will stop if they feel stupid)
            2. KVDW9A:  Method
              1. KVDWBI:  Phone poll
                  1. KVDW9N:  Phone poll to landlines - the traditional method which he seemed to specialize in
                  2. KVDWAE:  Phone poll to cell phones - newer, attracts younger audience
                  3. KVDWA5:  Should be limited to no more than 12 minutes, absolute longest he's heard is 25 minutes.
                  4. KVDYZB:  Call 400 to 1000 people.
                  5. KVDVNK:  Phone #s obtained by voter records or random number generation.
                  6. KVDX9L:  Things for which a focus group is better:
                    1. KVDX4Y:  Negative news about opposition usually backfires here (as person thinks it's a push poll)
                    2. KVDX84:  Reading a bio and asking how it sounds usually is a waste of time here
              2. KVDWF1:  Internet Poll - for younger audience
            3. KVDVQH:  Baseline Poll - (as phone poll) done at start; large.
              1. KVDVZW:  Question groups (in order)
                1. KVDW0V:  Issues (general issues)
                2. KVDW1O:  Faves (additional favorite issues?)
                3. KVDW3P:  Horse race (latest issue of the day)
                4. KVDW4D:  Bio (aspects of candidate's bio)
                5. KVDW4O: Policy (candidate's policy proposals)
                6. KVDW5I:  Demographics (age, race, location, education, political party, income, education)
            4. KVDVR9:  Mid-way Poll (done mid way: mid size).
            5. KVDVRU:  Tracking poll (tracks certain issues, done selectively)
          2. KVDVTE:  Focus Groups.
            1. KVDX65:  Done if can be afforded;
            2. KVDX6M:  Gets clarity of why people are reacting the way they do.
            3. KVDX6Z:  Usually consists of about 10 people in a 2 hour meeting
            4. KVDX7A:  Useful for exploring people's reaction to campaign ads, to candidate bios, negative news, and more.





KVA16I:  Some Document History
  1. KVDSDD:  2009.12.28pst1315- I DestinyArchitect created this document (Writely document KVDSDD); it's © Fully Copyright by the creator with all rights reserved except as stated otherwise in writing by the copyright holder.
    1. KVA3T1:  From: copying as directed Writely document KUJWXV) “Revision 674 -2009.12.28pst1313 (~94% complete 2nd draft; untested)
    2. KVA579:  Officially published at: http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kvdsdd.html
    3. KVA3VQ:  Motive (at creation): My immediate motive is to write down the notes I'm seeing on C-Span2 broadcast of American University (American.Edu) presentations by David Winston and Stephan Hankin, but I have general ideas I've had on persuading masses that occurred to me when developing Romes & Juliets (~2002).
    4. KVA3WV: Title (at creation): desiring name[Persuading the masses]; renamed to title[KVDSDD(Persuading the masses)].
    5. KVDYPL:  Title renamed to title[KVDSDD(Persuading especially the masses)] since added section Persuading the individual
    6. KVDZNQ:  First real published release as "[>]Revision 180 -2009.12.28pst1550 (~10% complete 1st draft):"







KUKYY1(LoveRules.Info videos 1)

-2009.12.13pst0024 (100% complete):
KUKZ8H:  Virtually all pages of http://LoveRules.Info are composed using the Writely editor

but since that currently can't embed videos, this is the 1st of special pages just for videos.
  1. KUKZBP:  video "What is Nudism" by the AANR Youth Ambassadors as featured June 22, 2008 on NudeRevolutionTV

    return to where you were in "Ubiquitous Nudism is likely healthy & somewhat-important"
  2.  

KUJWXV:  Some Document History
  1. KUKYY1:  I created the article by opening KUJWXV(LoveRules.Info post template) in Writely then copying into http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=7853131990825750723 (no Writely source). Then I renamed just the ID of this paragraph so official URL (created on it's first post) will contain just that in the name. I desired the title[Video "What is Nudism" by the AANR Youth Ambassadors] but I may have to reduce that to fit or may want to improve the name.  I then did[Publish Post] posting it to http://LoveRules.Info creating official URL http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kukyy1.html; then renamed to[KUKYY1(LoveRules.Info videos 1)] which fits (also generalizing this page for other videos since it's a pain to create a page for every video). 
  2.  KUL08S:  (2009.12.13pst0024) published version 1.
–above article LoveRules.Info videos 1 published at official URL: http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kukyy1.html

KUK20G(Why humans special? Top teaching, & likely THAT'S ALL!)

-2009.12.12pst1252 (~15% complete 1st draft):

KUK3CX:  What makes humans special?  Indeed what explains why & how we are obviously so different in so many ways than every other life form on this planet, that we invent (and invent and invent) and we dominate the planet?
  1. KUK3TR:  This is a age-old question which has lots of theories, but none I've heard of has been widely agreed on.
  2. KUK3HE:  My answer (which I came up with in about 1987)
    1. KUK3V7:  is "Top teaching, & likely THAT'S ALL!".
      1. KUK3RA:  Specifically humans are the only creature which teaches its young (and each other) in a way that accumulates with each generation.  All other life forms that we know of need to depend on just genetics (evolution) to develop from one generation to the next, whereas humans have been able to teach in a way that accumulates from one generation to the next, and indeed in a way that explodes, much the same way as compound interest.
        1. Details .... To be continued.@@
      2. KUK3RL:  And "THAT'S IT" to seemingly explain everything unique about humans:  there's nothing else needed it seems to explain how we've become like we are today.  No we don't need intelligent design, God, nor some "soul" that presumably only humans have, to explain seemingly everything that humans agree they humans see & experience.  
        1. KUK4DU:  So (many prepare to be disappointed) likely THAT'S IT -- likely there is NO more (than top teaching) to what makes humans special.
    2. KUK413:  "So if humans are essentially no different than any other life form we know (except for just "top teaching"), then why do I still have the deep feeling that we're special, that we can't be "ordinary", so there must be some "soul" in just us or a God which is treating us specially?"
      1. Answer.... to be continued@@@
    3. KUK4FV:  Consequently, we humans aren't "the mighty stalactite or stalagmite", but instead "the little drops of water" that happen to form it.  And if some "earthquake or weather change" or other forces of nature happen to come pass, like a drop of water we could just "drain away" somewhere else, potentially (like that drop) totally forgetting what we had built.   In short we are MUCH smaller that we like to think of ourselves and we need to be humble.  @@to be continued.



KUJWXV:  Some Document History
  1. KUK20G:  I created the article by opening KUJWXV(LoveRules.Info post template) in Writely then doing[File->Make a copy...] creating Writely doc source. Then I renamed to just the ID of this paragraph so official URL (created on it's first post) will contain just that in the name.  I originally desired article title[Why humans special? Teaching –Not enough to escape biology!] but I may have to reduce that to fit or may want to improve the name.  I then did[Share->Publish as web page->Post to Blog] posting it to http://LoveRules.Info creating official URL http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kuk20g.html; then renamed to[KUK20G(Why humans special? Top teaching, & likely THAT'S ALL!)] which fits.

–above article [KUK20G(Why humans special? Top teaching, & likely THAT'S ALL!)>yours] published at official URL: http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kuk20g.html




(LoveRules.Info post template)KUJWXV

[L4NJCR:>id]Revision 1238 -2010.08.07pst1118 (~99% complete 5th version):
[>pic]
header info
Contents —Read for a quick full-picture of what's here
  1. L4N2ZW: Document Participants, Topics, & Confidentiality

    --who & who-is-to use/have-access + topics, summarized from the Document History
    KL582LName of individual else groupTheir every relevant (Org & Title & Address)Their every (Document Role & its date range if not "always")
    KKUMN9anyonepublic”no-access (confidential info)
    KKUMIS--Those Support@Dreamhost.com trust & deem necessary to help solve thisauthor-who-can't-invite-others
    KKUMMO--Support@Dreamhost.com & their internal address DreamhostTest@Gmail.comauthor-who-can-invite-others-to-edit-or-view
    L4N7E8:Wesley S.of Support@Dreamhost.com (handles SVN issues)author-who-can-invite-others-to-edit-or-view
    KKUMHSDestinyArchitect--owner & initial author
    L4N8UB:2010.01~-2010.06.23~-present--topic
    L4N88W:MS Expression Web--topic
    L4N894:Dreamhost Subversion (SVN)--topic
    L4N6KT:
    Sample Values
    anyone; Wesley S.; DestinyArchitect; up to 10 by approval; 2010.01~-2010.06.23~-present; MS Expression Web; Dreamhost Subversion (SVN)public; Support@Dreamhost.com & their internal address DreamhostTest@Gmail.com; Those Support@Dreamhost.com trust & deem necessary to help solve this; of Support@Dreamhost.comno-access (confidential info); viewer; author-who-can't-invite-others; author-who-can-invite-others-to-edit-or-view; owner; topic
    .
  2. [KVV0OX: Sample item 1

    1. KVUZXE: Sample sub item

      1. KVUZXP: Sample sub-sub item

  3. KVV161: How to use this? See Writing Docs in ((post template)KKUJWXV instructions & history)KVUYWG

    >your body sections]

  4. KVA16I: Document Background & History

    1. KUJWXV: 2009.12.12pst1005 I DestinyArchitect “created & own this document”.

      1. L2MXTP:Confidentiality & Copyright: This document is copyrighted & could be confidential; specifically the document's owner(s) require all having this document abide by LoveRules.Info ownership & access rights (on LoveRules.Info About) with no exceptions unless its owner(s) state otherwise below or here:” no exceptions now.
      2. KVA3T1:Initially formed by: copying as directed” empty (created from scratch) “Revision <#/> <date/>” to new Writely doc KUJWXV http://docs.google.com/Edit?docid=0AX07OJ9W4BnBZGM2dnN4ZHdfMjQ3Nzk2Mzd4Zms.
      3. KVA3VQ:Motive at creation:” After creating the 1st 17 articles on http://Blogger.LoveRules.Info manually, decided to create this template; 1st article I created with it seems to be KUK20G(Why humans special? Top teaching, & likely THAT'S ALL!); symmetrically I'm making the template a post as well.
      4. KVA3WV:Title at creation: desiring name”[LoveRules.Info post template]; “renamed to” title[(LoveRules.Info post template)KUJWXV].
      5. KVA579:Initially Published-at URL:” http://Blogger.LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kujwxv.html.
    2. .

DO GOD(s) EXIST? Once clear-headed,probably best2think"No" KUGBEV

-2009.12.11pst1955: (~70% complete first-draft)
.
KUGCFD:  DO GOD(s) EXIST?
* Once clear-headed, it's probably best to think "No";
* when not in that state, it's probably best to think "Yes"

  1. KUH77Q:  Unless you fully agree with this conclusion especially the "No" part, PLEASE READ LINEARLY - Do NOT skip ahead.
  2. KUGCWK:  And first, before reading reading further,
    1. KUGD0Q:  it's important to ask you, If there was no God(s) nor divine benign spirit (as Jesus),  nor devil(s) either,
      1. KUGD3V:  Would you stop really trying to do the right thing, even if no one was watching?
      2. KUGD5F:  Would you feel life wasn't worth living, and kill yourself or let yourself die?
      3. KUGD91:  Would you more hurt yourself and/or others, or more let yourself or others come to harm?
        What are your answers to each of these?
    2. KUGDA0:  Until the answer to all 3 of these questions is sincerely "NO", just keep on believing as you're believing and read no further here.

    3. KUGDHX:  And only when you can give a sincere "NO" to every one of these 3 questions, read on...

  3. KUGCNP:  Maybe a good way to begin is to just quote my profile here on the topic of religion; as of now 2009.12.20 it reads:
    1. "Religiously Im Unitarian Universalist (“Everyone has a part of the answer” -see the org I created UU Young Adults Intl.) and esp. Scientific (Ignostic w/ Atheistic leaning), Libertarian, Utilitarian, plus “love all” and “do right Always”. Socially & romantically I follow LoveRules.Info."
  4. .KUGDMA:  If you've heard of "Ignostic" you may infer or just-guess-from-the-name, and accurately, that I am agnostic (meaning I can't say for sure if god(s) exist), so have no fear about what I'm about to say as:
    1. KUGEKZ:    I'm NOT going to be telling you if or not god(s) exist since obviously I just said I don't know myself (unless I wanted to be hypocrite, which I don't),
    2. KUGEF5:  So instead I'm going to just to be neutrally talking about the likelihood of God(s) existing. 
    3. KUGEP2:  Now you  my feel you know one way or the other, you may feel certain, but for the moment put yourself in my shoes and in my eyes of someone who doesn't know for certain.
  5. KUGDSE:  But there IS a tiny thing I DO "know" about the subject (well something which really seems correct to me, and perhaps to you, too).  Notice my profile also claims indeed I'm Ignostic (meaning that I claim we don't even have a good enough definition of what god(s) is/are to be able to say scientifically if god(s) exist)
    1. KUGEW9:  and if you think about it, that would sound a reasonable claim, too: the truth is we DON'T have a scientific definition of what god(s) is/are, and perhaps especially since god(s) come from religion (though I could think of other reasons).  Might you agree with that, too?  If not, please share why.
    2. KUGFD6:  And since we can't scientifically define god(s), the agnostic point of view is the most accurate in that we can't scientifically say if god(s) exist.
  6. KUGFUE:  But don't get me wrong, just because I'm not certain if god(s) exist does NOT automatically mean I don't feel the feelings you (else the majority of humans today) feel about believing in God.  As, just like you,  I am NOT walking around like an unemotional scientific robot;
    1. KUGJRP:  rather, probably like you, My first experience is that it feels good to believe...
      1. .KUGG8I:  ...that Jesus always loves me and is watching over me.
      2. .KUGGBL:  ...that there is a God who loves me and everyone, and when I die it's not really as sad as it would appear because if I did good things in life then I will go in Heaven, and have happiness ever after.
      3. KUGJ4S:  ...that if you don't know why things happen that way, just say "That's God plan"
    2. KUGGHI:  But hopefully unlike you I had one really terrible thing which happened to me in childhood (starting as an infant), and which cause me to consciously shut down most all my emotions for most of my life (except where they were just decorations & entertainment), and instead depend on pure logic for all of my decisions (and even (mis)thought most people did the same, at least when they were being respectful).  Well this really hurt much of my life as you could imagine, but it has had some hidden benefits, too: like a super-hero empowered by some tragic accident long in the past, it has also enabled to, much more than most adults, to not allow my thoughts & decisions to be swayed by emotion; it has trained me, as if for the Olympics, to live every moment with Spock-like objectivity.
    3. KUGGV4:  So while probably like everyone else I find these beliefs in god(s) and say Jesus feel good, I still can clearly see this doesn't prove they are true, just that they good, and so especially if they are not true, still so routinely believing them might actually be as bad as being loaded on cocaine: it feels great and so is very addictive, but isn't real.
  7. KUGR3W:  Still, since we're talking about if God exists, even if we can't scientifically define god(s) in order to say so, we can still say a little about
    the properties generally ascribed to god(s)
    so at least we can kind-of know what we talking about (if this sounds fuzzy, it is: blame it on most religion being (conveniently) imprecise).
    1. KUGR6X:  Well if talking about the leading talk of god(s) today, from the world's leading religions Christianity & Islam, the basics about gods they state include:
      1. KUGR92:  the religion is monotheistic: that there is only one god (called God)
        1. KUGXD4:  This keeps it maximally simple for everyone and has notable policing properties, and
      2. KUGT8V:  markedly helping humans identify with this God entity,
        1. KUGS9S:  that God thinks and feels and has values and a conscious similar as every human has 
        2. KUGT4L:  that God is good and wants good and
          1. KUGZII:  in particular loves & does what's best for all the humans (indeed the humans are often called "God's children")
        3. but this is were the similarities to humans end, as
      3. KUGSE2:  that God's values are perfect & the best for everyone and should never be questioned (most monarchies & police states think similarly)
        1. KUGTK6:  Note if we allowed multiple Gods (pantheism instead if the monotheism), then almost certainly the gods would (like humans) get ascribed different values so there would be multiple systems of values and easy confusion over which god to follow, which works against a monarchy or police state (one might (and perhaps did) say "The Greeks tried it and it had problems").
      4. KUGRHE:  that God is also all-knowing & sees everything all at once 
        1. KUGXGF:  so even better than the most perfect "eye in the sky", as "No matter where you go, you can't hide from God"
      5. .KUGUW6:  that even if a person doesn't get caught for a bad deed while alive, after he dies God will still punish him and worse (indeed probably sending him "Forever to burn in Hell")
      6. KUGXM0:  that (for all that are bad), there also exists Hell ruled by the Devil which is the opposite of God who is good.
      7. KUGSJT:  that God existed always and never dies 
        1. KUGTXA:  so, if you follow God, God will always be there for you, and if you don't, no matter how long you live you won't be able to wait out God and your Judgement Day)
      8. KUGRJO:  that God is all-powerful (so "beware" religious texts repeatedly say) and in fact
        1. KUGRBZ:  that God did and will do some terrible things to humans
        2. KUGSX9:  that everything which happens is "an act of God" (controlled & determined by God exactly), including
          1. KUGRB8:  that God created everything
      9. KUGRM5: that we humans have free will including can & do do things against God's will
        1. KUGU4D:  even though this God is-supposed-to-be deciding everything!; well, perhaps so we can't verify that and so much more...
      10. KUGRF7:  that God is invisible, we can't see God (at least while we're alive), well not unless God chooses to reveal himself to us while we're alive
        1. KUGSIU:  so (conveniently) we can't verify that God exists (well at least not until we're dead, and obviously at that point we can't tell anyone)
    2. KUGUBD:  Well are you thinking what I'm thinking?  For in writing these basic attributes of the God character, I can't help but wonder "Have we just been given the design for "The Emperor's New Clothes"?  Specifically did some (very human) monarchy rulers just invent all this stuff as a super cheap way to police everyone, indeed even without a police force?"
      1. KUGWDI:  "As given people are a little superstitious and unthinking as they were those thousands of years ago (and sadly many still are today), it would work (and did work) brilliantly!"
      2. .KUGWE9:  Indeed I could imagine if we could raise that monarch from the dead he would say, "Yeah, we did a pretty good job, didn't we!
        --A big improvement over the Ancient Greeks, too -- they screwed up with the polytheism, did you notice?
        Yes, with the Old Testament, including the Ten Commandments and such for the values part, it was working pretty great for a thousand years or so,
        until about 0 AD and then a number of people had broken so many rules that they didn't care anymore about our afterlife judgement day scare, indeed would argue no one ever saw this stuff anyway, so were just living it up and breaking even more rules, and there were just too many of these unruly people to kill;
        so we came up with this Jesus character to fix these folks: told 'em if they just confessed and asked for his forgiveness and started following, then they could get their afterlife back, and it worked! Yeah, we eventually had to kill a few sticklers, Jews (including some of them who saw our BS) who wouldn't switch over to our new plan, but then it overall worked  --We got everyone scared & policed again!
        But you guys aren't actually still believing this crap, are you?"
  8. KUGEYS:  But still, even if we can't scientifically say god(s) exist,
    let's still look at some arguments & for & against god(s) existing, but since admittedly we can't do this scientifically then just just we generally ascribe god(s) as being:
    KUGF2X:  Arguments suggesting god(s) may exist:
    1. .KUGPJ0:  (This is a theory I came up with when studying neural nets in ~1988 summer where I got my first patent.)  From the the perspective of a fly, humans are probably like gods; sometimes they leave food and garbage bins out "for them" for the flies to feast & gorge; and other times humans slap the flies and smash them and poison them and fry them with electricity. Being of limited intelligence, flies probably have no idea which it's going to be, as Humans are "Lord of the flies": but on this note of quoting Shakespeare, the full reference is "As flies to wanton boys, are we to the gods, — They kill us for their sport".  And here Shakespeare was onto something. As while flies have tiny brains and limited intelligence, so humans intelligence is finite as well.  And simulating the brains neural nets show that size matters: patterns exist which smaller neural nets simply have no way to see.  And of course mathematics will show that there is no limit to the complexity of a pattern.  So there could be being(s) which are so advanced that our our human neural nets simply can never see; the best we may be able to do is is just have some vague awareness or sense they exist, just as the fly probably sees we humans and (mis)call us gods.  And we should not laugh at the flies if they did, because in several points in history thousands of humans have believed another human was instead a god or divine spirit (and still do: note Christians, the biggest religion in the world - Christians believe the human Jesus is instead divine).  Still if there are such beings out there which are simply beyond our full comprehension of the human brain, this real analogy to what we've seen like that suggests that these beings are NOT gods, including definitely not all knowing nor thinking much about our interests, nor are they just one.
    2. TBA
    KUGF3U:  Arguments suggesting god(s) don't exist:
    1. .KUGCV2:  If God created the universe, then who created God?
      1. Well many proponents of God typically reply, "God just existed already."
      2. To which I (and other skeptics have thought to ask), "But if God existed already, then why couldn't the universe have just existed already?"
      3. Proponent: "That's obvious.  The universe is amazing, it couldn't have just happened, someone had to create it: God did! --by His Intelligent Design."
      4. Skeptic: "Well if the universe is amazing, and God created it, then God is even more amazing, right?"
      5. Proponent: "Absolutely"
      6. Skeptic: "Well then you've gone backwards in explaining things.  Instead of figuring out a mystery (which takes time & hard work, by the way), you've instead "explained" it by claiming it's due to yet another even bigger mystery.  You've make it worse not better."
      7. Proponent: "Well I don't think it though that much, just because it feels good."
      8. Skeptic: "`Just because it feels good.' -my point exactly!"
    2. KUGX7C:  The properties of God sound like the story was made up in order to enforce a monarchy police state --where  they had a serious shortage of police.
    3. KUGXSV:  As humans have free free will and sometimes do things against God, then contrary to scripture, it is obviously NOT the case that God is determining every action and having humans do good.
    4. KUGYGD:  If indeed God created everything and God is good and wants good and does what's best for humans, and God wants and does what's best for humans (his "children") then God would NOT:
      1. KUGZBN: create Hell and the Devil,
      2. KUGZBZ:  create and allow humans to bad things, indeed even to where it sends them forever to hell;
      3. KUGZCS: have done and continue terrible things to the humans, "God's Children"
      4. KUGZQ5:  --or is "child" abuse somehow also part of God's plan?
    5. KUGYOC:  If God is all-powerful and all-encompassing (created-everything) and everywhere (sees everwhere) and always, then why haven't I actually seen God?  As could it be that, despite all this, God is also invisible because this God doesn't actually exist?
    6. TBA
    1. .KUGFRY:  So even though we can't scientifically say either way (indeed again for starters because we don't have a scientific definition), overall there would appear more suggestion that god(s) don't exist.
  9. KUGJJQ:  IF belief in god(s) is not true, and even arguably very bad in some ways if not true, then why do the majority of humans today believe in god(s)?
    1. KUGJJ3:  My guess is one reason is it's like asking "Why is a large percentage of humans addicted to illegal & high-power drugs when those are sometimes even more destructive & deadly than the religious wars and other problems with religion?"  Because even if we know it may not be true, it feels good to believe.  And, just as it is with drugs, it's hard and indeed sometimes impossible to get people to see reality if they're addicted (this article certainly works hard to do it!).
    2. .KUGJUD:  Ever hear of "God fearing"?  It helps us govern people even when we couldn't possibly ever police them.  If we tell them "God is watching your every move even when no one else is watch you, and will punish you after you die for any wrongs even if you never see the punishment while you're alive", getting people to believe that is a ton cheaper (and sometimes more effective) than a police force.
  10. KUGLG7:  If there is no god(s), then what values/morals should one believe in?
    1. KUH6RH:  This is a deep question. It seems highly desirable to have the basic guidance (mentioned at the start) about doing-the-right-thing and such which believing in god(s) usually provide.
    2. KUH6S7:  Until I complete this section, please refer to Fixes below.
    3. TBA

  11. KUGFOY:  But Tony Robbins teaches effectively "It's no so much if a belief is true as it is [more] that constructive.".   So in this vein let's look the dangers & benefits of believing in god(s):
    KUGK6G:  Benefits in believing in god(s):
    1. KUGKN0:  It typically gives humans quick and often lasting hope even when they are not very intelligent and/or too stressed to be logical.
    2. KUGKOT:  It typically gives humans quick, good-sounding answers which calm them.
    3. KUGL24:  It polices humans incredibly well.
      This may be unavoidable, but when possible I'd much rather see more truthful & scientifically-credible stuff.
    4. KUGL3Q:  Because believing is done by the vast majority of humans, and is very important to many or most, believing buys you instant popular acceptance.  I have no easy fix for this important need, other than to say non-contradictory Unitarian Universalism has over 1000 congregations world-wide.
    5. KUGL8N:  It allows people, indeed entire countries, to be given a purpose of being, plus detailed moral guidance, which otherwise humans (like probably most creatures) don't know (as the genetic algorithm (which directs all life forms) doesn't remember why to do things, just directs what to be done); this need is perfectly valid but god(s) are likely not the best way to do it; instead see values and moralities if there is no god(s).
    6. KUH1ZY:  It gives one perspective from humility.  I feel humility is essential but it can seemingly be much better accomplished making Mother Nature your Higher Power and, second, the one-of-many humble view of Unitarian Universalism.  
    KUGK71:  Dangers in believing in god(s):
    1. KUGKTH:  Most anything (god & bad) can be justified as an act of god(s), a huge danger; in fact look at the many contradictions within the very basic definition of God itself;
    2. KUGKUE:  It cuts the motivation to find out really "Why", instead explaining potentially anything mysterious with  mere "it's just God's plan", another huge danger
      1. KUH5X3:  Most seriously the average "it's just God's plan" person might then not be motivated to find out that sociobiology is determining most everything he/she does
      2. KUH64S:  note seemingly no scientists are creationists; and indeed most scientists seem turned off by religion, keenly aware the these conflicts and dangers and probably unaware of Unitarian Universalism.
    3. KUGL0K:   It typically shuts down pursuit of knowledge whenever it appears in conflict with or might accurately show untrue god(s) and religions.
      1. KUGOMK:  Probably most serious of all for the average person, belief in creationism and sometimes God & Intelligent Design regularly blinds people from seeing sociobiology.
      2. KUH5JW:  History is also full of famous examples where religion (especially the Catholic Church) was stopping science (Galileo, Columbus, etc) and still is today (Stem Cell research)
    1. KUGKHX:  Hence the conclusion of this article, again "DO GOD(s) EXIST? Once clear-headed, it's probably best to think "No"; when not in that state, believing in god(s) is probably beneficial (why we humans then typically do it)."

  12. KUH21I:  Fixes:
    1. .KUH2O6:  To get your humility & guidance, look to Nature, as "Mother" Nature (what I also do, BTW)
      1. KUH29Y:  unlike god(s) this can be and easily is 100% scientifically accurate and is heavily if not entirely based on science.
      2. KUH221:  If you think it would be good to have a Higher Power (and it generally is), then make your "Higher Power" Nature, as "Mother" Nature
      3. KUH2AG:  While it's probably premature for me to say this, if you still want the spiritual & gods as well, you might want to consider paganism as I understand it has much higher focus and roots & appreciation of nature than Christianity & Islam  which I understand predates them as well.
    2. .KUH2LF:  Prefer the term "Higher Power" instead of "God(s)".
      1. KUH2N1:  It's a term that both believers and God(s) and many non-believers & agnostic can agree on.
      2. KUH2UJ:  And for those who have trouble agreeing, point out that  Nature, as "Mother" Nature is much more powerful than us, so could be considered our higher power.
      3. KUH2Y5:  "Higher Power" is the term which Alcoholics Anonymous used to replace "God" in their now terribly-famous 12-step program in order to be more welcoming, and is where I get this idea.
    3. .KUH34L:  Get involved in Unitarian Universalism (UU),
      1. KUH3C3:  which (rather uniquely) deliberately makes no statement as to if god(s) exist and is uniquely maximally open-minded while still being civil, 
      2. KUH3CF:  yet still has the music, ceremony and community of typical religions, plus 
      3. . KUH3GQ:  doesn't claim to have the official answer on anything but says everybody has a part of the answer and instead focuses on getting religions to appreciate each other & coexist
      4. KUH3D9:  has over 1000 congregations world-wide!

  13. KUGNEO:  Relevant articles include:
    1. KUGNEZ:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God (which says foremost "A basic problem is that there is no universally accepted definition of God or existence.")
    2. TBA
.

KQ5ZAU:  Some Document History:
  1. KUGBEV:  2009.12.10pst1128- 1st created in Writely source and posted to http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kugbev.html; wanted to title it quote[DO GOD(s) Exist? Once you're clear headed, probably best to think "No" KUGBEV] but was too long so named it quote[DO GOD(s) EXIST? Once clear-headed,probably best2think"No" KUGBEV] which was maximum other than trailing #s.  In first sitting, completed about 45%.  I am motivated to write this article (and especially with this title) to use cite it in scientific & especially sociobiology writing (as here where the idea came up) in order to quickly dismiss the "Could God be governing us" question which is mostly a distract-er as, for starters, God is so poorly defined.
  2. KUGG2W:  Since this is a delicate subject, I'm working very hard to present this material tactfully with much concern for it to be in the right order, with the possibility that religious conservative could be reading it.
  3. KUHAWI:  2009.12.11pst0015 1st published content at "(~70% complete first draft; read with that in mind.)"
Official URL: http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kugbev.html

RELIGIONS do marriage; STATES should only do civil unions! KUDPWH

(pic)(under construction; rough draft)
KUF6IU:  My key idea is that states should only do civil unions (not marriages, be them straight, gay, or any other type).  Instead any "marriage" declaration & handling should be entirely done by the religions (the religious congregation of the group getting united).
  1. KUF6O9:  Why?  This properly separates church & state.
    1. KUF6VT:  Most notably it allows religion to define "Marriage" anyway they want it to be, because then the state doesn't use this term.  It's a term in religion for over 2000 years (in the old testament, which then is used by both Christianity & Islam).  That's over 10x longer than any government (including America) has been around, so the term doesn't belong to the government/state, it belongs to the religions, so (also like the word "God") the state should leave it alone (don't use it).
    2. KUF6XU:  Instead the states should use the word "Civil Unions" which religions don't use (as best I know).
    3. KUF6Z8:  This then separates church & state; religions get their word "marriage" to individually do whatever they want with it, states/government gets their word "civil union" to do whatever they want with it, and everybody (or at least a lot more people) are happy.

  2. KUF720:  On a quick poll of about people who planned to vote YES (or abstain) on California's Proposition 8, 3 of 4 of them would vote NO if the wording was the states would do civil unions of people, not marriages, and yes even if that included same-sex civil unions.  
  3. KUF7IR:  Who's got this idea?
    1. KUF6HN:  This is an idea I independently came up with just before California's Proposition 8 vote when talking with a friend who of mine who is a Jehovah Witness.
    2. KUF7QK:  Though I've found other people have come up with it, too. ...

  4. KUF75Q:  So then two amendments need to be made:
    1. KUF76S:  1st.  Everywhere on the state's laws & forms documentation the word "Marriage" is replaced with the word "civil union"; so the state no longer handles "marriages" it handles "civil unions";  then add to this "For marriages, the state now refers people to get that from his/her religion."
    2. KUF7C6:  2nd.  "Civil Unions" are extended so the participants do not need to be of opposite sex (so same-sex civil unions are allowed).

http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kudpwh.html LAST UPDATED 2009.12.10pst00 from Writely source
KQ5ZAU:  Some Background on this Document:
  1. KUDPWH:  2009.12.09pst0149- 1st created in Writely source and posted to http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kudpwh.html; wanted to title it quote[States, do only civil unions; Marriages only by religion KUDPWH] and did.
  2. KUF6C8:  renamed to[RELIGIONS do marriage; STATES should only do civil unions! KUDPWH]; wrote up the basic ideas.


One's Legal License for Sexual Activity –it's about time! KUDB06

KUDC17:  My proposal is require a person to have a valid legal license in order to do sexual activity, very similar to (indeed modeled after) having to have a driver's license in order to drive (pic on right is in the spirit of what I envision, a sample ID from a real service STFree currently providing a tiny subset of what I envision).
  1. KUEKTV:  My overall reason is:
    1. KUDC9E:  Like driving, sexual activity hurts and sometimes even kills lives & families,.  And while the damage isn't quite as fast as a traffic collision, to the planet and overall lives (with divorces and broken family the norm and the planet running out of resources) the damage today & risk to the planet is arguably much more severe.
    2. (pic)KUDI22:  And because having sex now required earning a license to do it (instead of just being able to do it), and indeed a license which you needed to maintain and could be taken away, likely everyone would behave a lot more sexually responsibly, including 
      1. KUEL49:  dramatically less disease, and especially dramatically fewer broken hearts & families and uncared for & poorly raised kids
      2. KUEL4U:  And due this dramatic increase in education & standards on healthy sex life (not just the sex act), there should be marked decrease in related sexual problems as sexual abuse, harassment, rape, & assault and child sexual abuse, and sex exploitation (sexploitation) of children & adults.
  2. KUDCYR:  Areas regulated & laws:
    1. KUELIJ:  comprehensive coverage of full sex life, not just the sex act --why its name
      1. KUELMR:  In contrast, most "sex ed" courses mislead by their very name, as most cover just the physicals of the sex act (right pic), not the emotions and not all the dating & romance & relationships leading up and following that.
        1. KUELTW:  This is probably because all these other areas of sex are complex and even many (most?) of the most famous adults haven't sorted it out (as Bill Clinton & Tiger Woods, to name just a few), so to be politically correct, modern adults don't say anything (! -which I think is also wrong: the opposite extreme).
        2. KUEM01:  So the name "sex ed" & its lack of coverage easily (mis)leads your average teen or adolescent to think, "I got my sex ed class.  Now I know all there is to know about sex!" though most every adult (with some dating under his/her belt) would laugh at this (mis)claim (though it really isn't funny), knowing that that sex ed class is just the tip of the iceberg as far as a real sex life. 
      2. KUEMK0:  On this note I do not call this just a "license for sex" ("sex license") as STIs, jealousy & cheating, and a host of other problems can be caused by sexual activity which is not strictly speaking sex as in sexual intercourse.
      3. KUDDI3:  But romantic activity outside of clearly-sexual activity would probably not be covered here as much that seems too blurry and possibly too small to effectively codify.
      4. KUDN4F:  Consequently I call this a "a license for sexual activity" ("sexual activity license") or perhaps "license for (the) sexual" ("sexual license") and embed "sex life" whenever possible in the particular license names.
    2. KUDC84:  The rules would be a collection of the following 3 key sexual domains:
      1. KUDCHW:  General rules as Sex ONLY SAFELY: what all does "SAFELY" mean? KUCJ9X including:
        1. KUEJJ3:  In order to keep one's license for sex valid/current, it would require routine & standardized STI/STD checking & correction, similar to a smog certificate required to renew your vehicle' registration
          1. KUEJW5:  --quite similar to the routine testing required by real service STFree.
          2. *KUEJXB:  --would drastically reduce sexually-transmitted infection/disease throughout society.
          3. KUETIA:  You would be sexually tested according to computer-generated doctor-recommended schedule; once a year else every time you got a tested, you would  report the "mileage" you placed on your genitalia (similar to reporting your odometer on your vehicle you register) including the number of sexual partners & sex frequency you had since your last report plus the kinds of protection you used.  This plus statistics based on your age, sex, and location, would be used (by computer) to tell what tests you should have and at what frequency.
        2. *KUEK0N:  Since the rules would include when it is okay to raise a child, the biggest benefit would be a dramatic reduction in the number of broken hearts & families and uncared-for or not-properly-raised kids.
        3. KUEMY7:  It also (is being extended to) include some basics to avoid & minimize romantic cheating plus establish reasonable romantic agreements.
      2. KUDDZ0:  Incorporating (& improving) present sexual harassment & sexual assault laws.
      3. (pic)KUDCIC: And the many romance forms and their particular rules, analogous to rules of the road one was currently driving, for the various kinds of roadways one might encounter in his/her sex life. For instance, (and getting a bit fanticiful),
        1. (pic)KUEOD5:  Going down the road of monogamy, outside sex isn't allowed, so we imagine here "cross-streets" never occur else we don't let them occur else we pretend they never occurred or shouldn't have occurred.
        2. (pic)KUEOL4:   Going down the road of swinging, that's like a two way street but with only tiny cross-streets (other relations just sex-only), and if those cross-streets grow bigger, we try to stop that or we pretend it never & doesn't happen.
        3. (pic)KUEOEC:  Going down the the road of polygamy, that's like one-way street, either all going north (male leads everything) or all going south (female leads everything), and again with no cross-streets, so without later changing the street (but how?!), even if you can get to your destination you can't get back.
        4. (pic)KUEOMA:  Going down the road of polyamory, that's like normal streets (two way; and with cross streets: some bigger, some smaller, and some the same size).
        5. KUEP74:  (So which roadway would you prefer to drive? :-)
    3. KUDS5S:  ideally there then would be no minimum age for someone to have sex provided he/she had a valid license for sex.  This has enormous consequences & benefits which I cover below.
  3. KUENII:  Some smaller adult consequences:
    1. (pic)KUDGVJ:  The many deadbeat dads (and moms) bringing into the world kids that they weren't supporting would get sterilized or a chastity belt.
    2. (pic)KUDGMT:  It would also have stopped the Octomom from having 14 kids when she was "unemployed and on public assistance programs at the time" plus no man/father to help care for them.  She would have likely gotten sterized or a chastity belt after her first batch of 6.
    3. KUDG3P:  Someone who was notably mentally disabled (so couldn't pass the sexual activity license test) could not have sexual activities with others.  T2his would also seem wise especially to keep from parenting kids which they then couldn't care for and could easily have the same disorders.
  4. KUDGY6:  Per above ideally having a license would determine if you could have sex, and not your age.  This has big consequences and advantages:
    1. KUDSXD: 2 Just as would a test & license to be considered an adult (another "brilliant" idea humans seem to have forgotten), a test & license to have sex, instead of an arbitrary age, is much more in line with "primitive" human society which apparently worked for maybe 20,000 years or more (prior to about 2000 BC) where girls & boys & girls would have to prove themselves (through training & tests) in order to be allowed to be considered men & women and have the privilege (marriage and houses and sex) that adults had.
    2. KUDSKV:  Present laws for age of consent (an arbitrary age at which a person could legally have sex, which make as much sense as saying "anyone over 16 can drive a car!") would be entirely replaced (phased out) by the need to have a license to have sexual activity instead of simply being some arbitrary age.
    3. KUDFEK:  Statutory rape would then simply mean "sexual relations when one participant is a minor without a license" instead of "when one participant was below age of consent" and eliminated would be the confusing Romeo and Juliet exception laws ("if the difference in age is less than x years, then it doesn't count").
    4. KUDEEM:  Responsible younger people below age of consent (who could pass the test) could have sex no problem (and would likely behave more responsibly): 
      1. (pic)KUDHUE:  Since having sex required to earn a license (covering pregnancy and much more), instead of just being able to do it because you can, this would probably significantly cut down on teenage pregnancies and teenage parents.
      2. (pic)KUDHI7:  Just like teenagers driving if they had a license, sex between two teenagers (below age of consent), as two high school sweethearts having sex, would no longer be illegal (a seemingly silly law, especially since it's virtually never enforced) provided they both had valid sex licenses which, since they had to earn and could be taken away, would now get them to be more responsible.
      3. (pic)KUDG34:  Consequently it would be perfectly legal for say a 16 year-old (or younger) to have sex with a 39 year old (or older) provided they both had a valid license, which would seem fine.  (Sadly, with current law this would be a major felony in all states; indeed even in fairly liberal California, if the age difference was more than 3 years (and one is under 18) then it is a potential very serious felony which I understand would permanently label the older a sex offender and (statutory) rapist and send them away for prison for 7 years or more.  If both persons were qualified in sexual relations, this seems crazy.  Indeed how quickly we seem to forget that seemingly for 99.9% of humanity humans only lived to about age 30 and were paired off "for marriage" at age 816 to about 14.)
    5. KUDGYR:  The many older people (above age of consent) but not behaving responsibly sexually would be stopped.  For instance, see these adult consequences.
  5. KUEF55:  Like a driver's license, the sexual tests would be the same for everyone and everyone (both sexes) would have to qualify, so (as with the best ballroom dancers), both sexes would have to learn the leader role (as flirting and asking someone out) plus the follower role (as being asked out & flirted with). 
  6. KUEGXX:  Like DMV licenses for various vehicle types (automobile, motorcycle, commercial truck),
    sexual activity licenses offered would include, from least to most advanced:
    1. KUERML:  Basic licenses for sexual activity:
      1. (pic)KUEH4R:  Licensed for Heterosexual life & sex
      2. (pic)KUEH51:  Licensed for Homosexual life & sex
      3. (pic)KUEHI3:  Licensed for Bisexual life & sex
        1. KUERQC:   --simply get both of the above (heterosexual & homosexual)
        2. KUERVN:  --eventually society may progress to where everyone is required to get a bisexual license, but since that would require having sex with both sexes, it I wouldn't expect that until at least 20 years after the program started.
    2. KUF0ZI:  Licenses for multi-partner sexual activity:
      1. (pic)KUEH5W:  Licensed for Multi-partner romances (as medium polyamory
        1. KUEHOI:  --would first require being licensed in one basic license.
      2. (pic)KUEH67:  Licensed for Multi-partner sex (as advanced polyamory)
        1. KUEHZ5:  --would first require being licensed in all the above (except that a strict homosexual could skip heterosexual sex since all partners would be of the same sex)
    3. KUEH6D:  Licensed for sex work (a commercial license),
      1. KUEI23:  --would also require a license (at least one of the above) for each area being worked, with naturally the more licenses the more prestigious.
      2. KUEJBG:  Would insure all prostitutes & sexual escorts were licensed (today most all typically aren't).
  7. KUETSI:   The license issuers would maintain a "sex record" for each licensee (analogous to a "driving record")
    1. *KUEVA7:  A potential romance partner could (and would be wise to) request a sex record before else as soon as possible when getting romantic with another.  Indeed this is the whole point of the STFree service
    2. KUETXF:  If the report owner gives someone access, that person could be conveniently view the report within a minute or two by:
      1. .KUETZ1:  A secure website.
      2. KUETZA:  Calling an automated phone line as STFree does
      3. KUEU08:  Possibly via text (SMS) message to an automated service that texts back.c
    3. KUEVM6:  The record would have:
      1. KUEU0X:  give sexual problems (especially STIs plus any sex offenses) which are or could be currently applicable or would be at risk of now having.
      2. KUEU2Q:  possibly a sexual health score analogous to a credit score.
      3. KUEVRG:  Photo (as STFree does) & physical identifiers of the person
      4. KUEVSB:  Permanent unique ID (not social or driver's license) where to send messages and, if necessary, report the person.
      5. KUEUAQ:  Exact legal identity (as legal name) --probably not
        1. KUEU66:  I am undecided if this report should have the person's legal name; STFree does not and I'm tending to think they may be right.
    4. KUETVP:  Like any medical record, this record would not be public: an individual would have to release it to someone else.
      1. KUEU3M:  Unlike today's credit reports (which are not secure) it could not be released by a printed signature; the giver must log on and and grant the other person access, else give the person access by secure digital signature, else give the other person a password which would soon expire.
    5. KUEW9D:  Unlike STFree suggests, I don't imagine most people checking this report of a potential partner before having sex unless they were considering unprotected sex.  Rather I imagine the confidence the license would instill (because it required passing & maintaining standards to get it) would be enough for most people, just as it seems to with a driver's license.  But I could be wrong, and fortunately today's Internet and phones could allow for instant latest status check
  8. KUEUOH:  To handle all the above and more,
    I propose one more "Department of Sexuality".
    1. .KUEUVR:  Similar to having each state have a Department of Motor Vehicles, (in the long term) each state would seeming have it's "Department of Sexuality" but in the immediate term it might be handled by one or more private organizations each similar to what STFree does. 
    2. KUEURC:   It would handle
      1. KUEURU:  Issuing and maintaining every resident's license for sexual activity and related records.
      2. KUEUHC:  Sex offender lists (per Megan's law) would be included in these sex licensing records and later merged into them.
      3. KUEV04:  The info from agencies dealing with deadbeat parents would also be included here and eventually those agencies may be merged into here.
  9. (pic)KUDCY9:  Enforcement
    1. KUDCZL:  I don't think bedroom "sex cops" (analogous to traffic cops) would go over too well (well unless they were as cute as this gal on the right ;-), but there must be away to detect & report incidents, however, just like traffic accidents, ordinary police would likely be called in to report smaller common incidents.
    2. KUDE5D:  For bigger and more advanced sexual crimes (as rape, pedophilism, etc), your typical Special Victims Unit would handle it
  10. (pic)KUDD15:  Judging
    1. KUDD1S:  Instead of being directed to "traffic court" if one did something wrong you would be directed to "sex court", which like traffic court, would feature a judge specializing in these sexual laws.
  11. KUDDND:  Penalties:
    1. KUDDNN:  Reasonably similar to driving laws but specialized, penalties would include (from least to worse):
      1. KUDDPF:  Monetary fines
      2. (pic)KUDDPO:  Sex school (instead of "traffic school")
      3. (pic)KUDDUU:  "Fix it ticket" as ordered to be sexual disease/infection tested & cured
      4. KUDDTS:  "No contact" and Restraining orders
      5. KUDDQ7:  Having to get sterilized and/or wear a chastity belt  (instead of your vehicle wheel getting booted, your genitals could get locked up from public access)
      6. KUDE8C:  Castration (for men); apparently no equivalent for women.  
        1. KUDH5I:  Say of convicted pedophiles who wouldn't stop.
      7. (pic)KUDH2D:  Have one's license (for sexual activity) suspended or revoked.
      8. KUDDXE:  Incarceration (as for violent rape)
  12. KUDCNH:  The idea I came up with in about 2001 (of "requiring a person to have a valid legal license in order to do sexual activity, very similar to (indeed modeled after) having to have a driver's license in order to drive").  
  13. KUDC66:  Getting one's license for sexual activity is modeled after (and about as difficult as) getting a driver's license.
    KUERK2:  Here is the format for the basic license for sexually activity (a license for either Heterosexual- or homosexual- life & sex license: it's designed to work for both),
    with the other licenses similar in structure:
    1. (pic)KUEB6I:  1st you'd study the material you'd be tested on, as ideally LoveRules.Info on Romance (or the equivalent).
    2. (pic)KUEBAB:  2nd you'd take a written test (LoveRules.Info will feature these as soon as we find the testing & survey site to use); ideally it wouldn't have be done in-person other than to insure that the answers were yours.
    3. (pic)KUEBSL:  3rd, if you passed, you would then be issued a provisional/training license which would allow you to have sexual activity as long as someone (as a parent or a friend) with a valid license (for say more than 10 years):
      1. KUEBPI:  is continually present (yes, another nice thing is sex stops being so private that often never in one's lifetime is it ever seen & reviewed by anyone but your partner); or
      2. KUEBQ9:  or, for those squeamish, possibly that that the experienced license holder is his/her sex partner (some others may not like this age difference so then elect for the former option).
      3. KUEBTM:  And one would then go practice sexual activity for real.
    4. KUEBD8:  4th: When ready, one would take the physical (real test).
      1. (pic)KUEC6F:  As with the driver's test, this test would be supervised by license-issuer staff.
      2. KUEC6N:  Unlike the driving of your drivers test, to conform to present conventions & laws, your sex acts would not be performed on the public streets.
        1. (pic)KUECES:  The introductions & dating could occur in a public setting but for the sex act it would occur in a private bedroom which either likely the license staff would have else (like the test car) the test taker would provide.
        2. (pic)KUECCU:  To reduce costs & trouble, the option may be given that the testee could submit his performance on a video of himself and his/her partners showing the requested interactions.
      3. KUECH3:  The real test would be comprehensive (and remember done by both sexes), covering:
        1. KUEG0W:  The introduction (first with the testee is the leader and the other person as the follower, then reverse roles)
          1. (pic)KUEG3C:  Leader introduces him/herself to someone brand new for the purposes of a romantic relationship
          2. KUEG4V:  Follower turns down the leader; leader asks for reasons; follower tells leader the real reasons.
          3. (pic)KUEG5G:  Leader introduces him/herself to someone else brand new as before, and follower accepts invite.
          4. KUEG6N:  Leader asks follower for phone # & email
          5. KUEG7M:  Follower refuses phone # but gives email
          6. KUEG89:  Leader emails follower to go on a date
          7. KUEG8Z:  Follower doesn't reply
          8. KUEG97:  Leader sends follower a polite reminder
          9. KUEGCK:  Follower accepts
        2. (pic)KUECN7:  Doing the date.
        3. KUECNN:  The sex act itself (done in private); it must be a sexual activity not resulting in kids nor disease:
          1. KUEEQM:  STI inquiry & informing ;
            1. KUET4S:  if any STIs, appropriate condom or protection or limitation should be used according to doctor's direction (likely immediately at this point).
          2. KUEEPY:  kissing & foreplay sufficient to get all females fully wet and all males fully erect.
          3. (pic)KUEEQ3:  mutual oral sex: the sex position 69
            (hey, personally I'm not much of muff diver but it's obviously good training & foreplay, so read the the sign :-)
          4. KUESTI:  All condoms & devices must be on by this point (as all males put condom), if not on sooner due to STIs.
          5. KUEGHR:  sexual intercourse (penis into vagina else (if gay male) anus; if lesbian, then a dildo will be used to insert into both)
            1. (pic)KUESS2:  first the testee on top and then testee on bottom (see position possibilities), (or reverse based on a coin flip), , and insure safe non-kid nor-disease producing sex was done, plus insuring after-sex respect.
            2. (pic)KUEWJE:  All participants would have to reach orgasm but (since this is just a basic test) they need not reach it at the same time.
          6. KUEWLP:  Throughout the test, no unsafe bodily fluid transfer can occur.
        4. KUEDOJ:  Difficulty increase: would a small romantic involvement with others mates mess up the relationship, or can testee manage additional mates which he/she is very attracted to or very jealous of? 
          1. KUEE6V:  First, testee & sex partner are told "For these next tests, imagine in your relationship that your sex partner flirting and even romantically kissing another potential mate is permissible so NOT cheating."
          2. (pic)KUEDBU:  Minimal multi-mate management: testee is flirted with and then enjoyable romantically kisses another mate he/she is attracted to, while knowingly his/her first sex partner watches. Immediately after, testee & sex partner must enjoyable romantically kiss while knowingly the 3rd person watches.  Did everyone do the whole thing sincerely pleasantly?
          3. KUECOV:  Minimal jealousy management : testee watches his/her sex partner get very flirtatious with another potential mate, then very romantically kiss.  After this, the testee and partner must then get romantic, at least to the point of passionate kissing.  How does he/she handle it?
  14. KUDKI7:  Relevant work
    1. KUDMK4:  Google Search[sex OR sexual license -"Safe Sex License" -STFree -"Sexual Liberation or Sexual License"] (first 3 pages) finds nothing relevant other than a 2009 blog entry which brings up the concept just a tiny side-joke which brought some commentary.
    2. KUDLFK:  Disclosing your STI/D status to potential & current sex partners (a small but important portion of the above):
      1. (pic)KUDKIQ:  http://STFree.com , found 1st by Google Search[license for sex], gives a credit-card "Safe Sex License" which 2006 review here says "Created by an ex-porn star from New York City, it allows you to track the sexual history of your potential partner simply by entering their membership number via telephone."  The initial cost is "$24.99" plus "we require our members to update their Safe Sex License at least 1 time every 6 months." then must soon (to stay valid) "purchase an update package" - I'm not sure the cost of that.  Google Search[(safe sex license) OR STFree] finds many reviews.  A 2008 review says "More than 15,000 people nationwide have signed up"
      2. KUDLF5:   Patient portals as the big 3 open to everyone probably have the ability to disclose your STIs (and probably any medical information) to others via web browser, though I haven't tried it.


http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kudb06.html LAST UPDATED 2009.12.08 from Writely source
KQ5ZAU:  Some Background on this Document:
  1. KUDB06:  2009.12.08pst2027- 1st created in Writely source and posted to http://LoveRules.Info/2009/12/kucj9x.html; wanted to title it quote[One's Legal License for Sexual Activity –it's about time! KUDB06] and did.
  2. KUF4XN:  2009.12.09pst2010- 1st draft completed; published and delivered to Lucy for proofing.