Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Digital Art / Professional PJ TostitoMale/Ecuador Groups :iconcrazycatcollege: CrazyCatCollege
Here kitty kitty~ ;3
Recent Activity
Deviant for 4 Years
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 69 Deviations 42,618 Comments 64,562 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

Groups

Watchers

deviantID

ManboobLover69's Profile Picture
ManboobLover69
PJ Tostito
Artist | Professional | Digital Art
Ecuador
I'm a professional artist, having been in the industry for over 20 years. My artwork varies greatly with subject, but I hope to find my place here on deviantART. Send a note my way if interested in a commission.

31 | Scorpio | He/Him at 12 AM-11 AM, She/Her at 12 PM-11 PM UTC Mon-Fri, They/Them all day on Sundays | Ecuador | Asexual | Mates: 8

Facebook: www.facebook.com/profile.php?i…

I am proudly CHRISTIAN stamp by aguzzla22autistic by windows99Confederate -STAMP- by Dont--Tread--On--MeStraight -n- Proud by Straight-Pride
Interests

I am not writing to agree or disagree with God. What I have to say, however, regards God's decision to destroy our country from within. In the rest of this letter, I will use history and science (in the Hegelian sense) to prove that he's the patron saint of antidisestablishmentarianism. Woe to the grungy megalomaniacs who encourage individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed! He doesn't want me to invite all the people who have been harmed by God to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus. A recent series of hearings, lawsuits, and media reports demonstrates that many innocent people are being manipulated into stripping the world of conversation, friendship, and love by the most sickening display of censorious cant that I have ever witnessed in my entire life. God's recommendations represent not only a denial of reality, but also an especially doctrinaire sort of spiritual poison that will retain an institution which, twist and turn as you like, is and remains a disgrace to humanity within a short period of time. So let God call me stentorian; I call him stinking.

God managed to convince a bunch of the worst types of chthonic clowns I've ever seen to help him poke and pry into every facet of our lives. What was the quid pro quo there? It is only when one has an answer to that question is it possible to make sense of his capilotades because his primary goal is to introduce, cultivate, and encourage moral rot. All of his other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that ageism is a constant thread winding its way through God's political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that God is a spokesman for God. This just goes to show (to me, at least) that the concept of risk includes the relationship between the consequences and probability of an event. If the consequences of an event are extremely negative, such as the devastation resulting from God stepping on other people's toes, then you want the probability of the event occurring to be vanishingly small, as close to zero as possible. Unfortunately, the likelihood of God defying the rules of logic is so high that one can't help but conclude that his biggety ebullitions are a locomotive of vigilantism. We need to get off that train as quickly as possible; the tracks lead straight to Hell. Personally, I would much rather be on a train in which the passengers recognize that there are longiloquent dodos in our midst. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. God does, and that's why his allocutions are becoming increasingly ribald. They have already begun to provide impulsive, cocky tatterdemalions with an irresistible temptation to impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled God to meddle in everyone else's affairs. If you don't want such a time to come then help me criticize God's threats publicly for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. Help me put the fear of God into God.

If God bites me I will bite back. He likes spattering my reputation. That's the most damnable thing about him. It's also why if you can make any sense out God's insolent methods of interpretation then you must have gotten higher marks in school than I did. God's compadres believe a conspiracy of cantankerous hellions control banking, foreign policy, and the media. Now I could go off on that point alone, but I have to wonder where he got the idea that it is my view that he is beyond reproach. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true, and I've never written anything to imply that it is.

God might develop mind-control technology when you least expect it. What are we to do then? Place blinders over our eyes and hope we don't see the horrible outcome? I've been trying to get him to admit that he uses words like “phenolsulphonephthalein” to give his notions an air of culture and elegance. Yes, I know what you're thinking: Getting him to admit such a thing would challenge even the most patient of Zen masters. Nevertheless, I avow that it's worth a try because God keeps missing my point. More specifically, he keeps getting hung up on my words without seeing the underlying meaning. For example, when I say that God leads candlelight vigils in support of authoritarianism, God seems incapable of realizing that what I'm really getting at is that he says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions—even our library records. Why on Earth does he need to monitor our library records? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that whenever people fail to fall for God's nocuous deceptions, he tries leading them to the slaughterhouse via the back entrance. If that ploy still doesn't work, God then sics his blood-drenched, murderous camp in all of its resplendent foulness upon them.

Consider the issue of temulent faddism. Everyone agrees that God's viewpoints offer us nothing more than the same old snake oil in a shinier bottle, but there are still some brassbound degenerates out there who doubt that I'm giving God the benefit of the doubt, which is more than he's given me. To them I say: God must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why God accuses me of admitting that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, postmodernist behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. What I actually said is that God markets his reportages as helpful and entertaining. In reality, they're a a hellish nightmare from which we may never awaken. We need to keep our eyes on him. Otherwise, he'll obstruct various important things eventually. If that thought doesn't send chills down your spine then you are dead to the love of freedom. The rest of us are concerned that God wants to make it impossible to disturb his scornful gravy train. That's indisputably a formula for repression and resentment and will lead to him destroying, debauching, devaluing, and dehumanizing a wide assortment of innocent people by next weekend.

Rhetoric aside, God's reaction to our latest crisis diligently fulfils the first law of reactive politics. That is to say, do something, no matter how loud. Issue orders. Look busy. Forget about how God has been impacting public policy for years to come. Should doing so buy him the right to dialogue, negotiation, concessions, and power? I say no because I like to say that a surprisingly large number of lawless despots have close ties with God. He never directly acknowledges such truisms but instead tries to turn them around to make it sound like I'm saying that he's a saintly figure—philanthropic, noble, and wise. I guess that version better fits his style—or should I say, “agenda”?

There are two essential characteristics of God's utterances that are indisputable. Firstly, they are a product of gross syncretism in that they combine sectarianism and triumphalism. Secondly, they are a tool for meddling in everyone else's affairs. The worst part of God's utterances is that they do little to raise understanding about how God once said that he possesses infinite wisdom. His blackshirts and others capable of little more than rote psittacism are now saying that too. In contrast, I say that God's favorite tactic is known as “deceiving with the truth”. The idea behind this tactic is that he wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to investigate the development of Bonapartism as a concept.

It's astonishing that God has been able for so long to get away with apotheosizing ill-natured, goofy four-flushers. I can't think of anything that better illustrates the failure of our justice system to deal with such ophidian putterers. Today, as yesterday, I think we should knock down his house of cards. By “house of cards,” I'm referring to the fragile, highly unstable, and diabolic framework of lies on which God's popularity is based. Without that framework, people everywhere would come to realize that God undeniably believes that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. He has apparently constructed a large superstructure of justifications for this a priori conclusion. I guess that shouldn't be too surprising given that if the country were overrun by the worst kinds of patronizing skivers there are, we could expect to observe widespread discrimination in our daily lives—stares from sales clerks, taxis that don't stop, and unwarranted license and registration checks by police.

Let me back up a little: God's detachment from, or denial of, the truth is not just a political tactic or say-anything-to-please character flaw. It reveals an elemental attitude that he shares with venal fomenters of revolution: concocting a version of reality that fully contradicts real life. God says that his writings are a veritable encyclopedia of everything that is directly pertinent to mankind's spiritual and intellectual development. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. It's often hard to decipher his vain comments. Obviously, God flees clarity whenever it involves unpleasant shouldering of responsibility, but I maintain that in this case, the acid test for his “kinder, gentler” new musings should be, “Do they still maintain social control by eliminating rights and freedoms?” If the answer is yes then we can conclude that if God gets his way, we will soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of Mohockism and indescribable horror. That's why I'm telling you that he ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person.

I must ask that God's apostles spark a powerful student movement that will fight for justice everywhere. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to censor any incomplicitous policies. To oppose diabolism, we must oppose revanchism. To oppose tribalism, we must oppose Bulverism. And to oppose God, we must oppose confused, rude defalcators. Like Howard Beale, I'm as mad as Hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore. Rather, I'm going to devote the rest of my life to transforming our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Activity


improvement meme by ManboobLover69
improvement meme
updated improvement meme!  just draw at least 20 hours every day guys c'mon it's not that hard
Loading...
Fck by ManboobLover69
Fck
highkey disappointed in my friends who never followed me on my new main account of over one year, commenting on these things like they're my actual work now.
Loading...

I am not writing to agree or disagree with God. What I have to say, however, regards God's decision to destroy our country from within. In the rest of this letter, I will use history and science (in the Hegelian sense) to prove that he's the patron saint of antidisestablishmentarianism. Woe to the grungy megalomaniacs who encourage individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed! He doesn't want me to invite all the people who have been harmed by God to continue to express and assert their concerns in a constructive and productive fashion. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus. A recent series of hearings, lawsuits, and media reports demonstrates that many innocent people are being manipulated into stripping the world of conversation, friendship, and love by the most sickening display of censorious cant that I have ever witnessed in my entire life. God's recommendations represent not only a denial of reality, but also an especially doctrinaire sort of spiritual poison that will retain an institution which, twist and turn as you like, is and remains a disgrace to humanity within a short period of time. So let God call me stentorian; I call him stinking.

God managed to convince a bunch of the worst types of chthonic clowns I've ever seen to help him poke and pry into every facet of our lives. What was the quid pro quo there? It is only when one has an answer to that question is it possible to make sense of his capilotades because his primary goal is to introduce, cultivate, and encourage moral rot. All of his other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that ageism is a constant thread winding its way through God's political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that God is a spokesman for God. This just goes to show (to me, at least) that the concept of risk includes the relationship between the consequences and probability of an event. If the consequences of an event are extremely negative, such as the devastation resulting from God stepping on other people's toes, then you want the probability of the event occurring to be vanishingly small, as close to zero as possible. Unfortunately, the likelihood of God defying the rules of logic is so high that one can't help but conclude that his biggety ebullitions are a locomotive of vigilantism. We need to get off that train as quickly as possible; the tracks lead straight to Hell. Personally, I would much rather be on a train in which the passengers recognize that there are longiloquent dodos in our midst. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. God does, and that's why his allocutions are becoming increasingly ribald. They have already begun to provide impulsive, cocky tatterdemalions with an irresistible temptation to impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled God to meddle in everyone else's affairs. If you don't want such a time to come then help me criticize God's threats publicly for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. Help me put the fear of God into God.

If God bites me I will bite back. He likes spattering my reputation. That's the most damnable thing about him. It's also why if you can make any sense out God's insolent methods of interpretation then you must have gotten higher marks in school than I did. God's compadres believe a conspiracy of cantankerous hellions control banking, foreign policy, and the media. Now I could go off on that point alone, but I have to wonder where he got the idea that it is my view that he is beyond reproach. This sits hard with me because it is simply not true, and I've never written anything to imply that it is.

God might develop mind-control technology when you least expect it. What are we to do then? Place blinders over our eyes and hope we don't see the horrible outcome? I've been trying to get him to admit that he uses words like “phenolsulphonephthalein” to give his notions an air of culture and elegance. Yes, I know what you're thinking: Getting him to admit such a thing would challenge even the most patient of Zen masters. Nevertheless, I avow that it's worth a try because God keeps missing my point. More specifically, he keeps getting hung up on my words without seeing the underlying meaning. For example, when I say that God leads candlelight vigils in support of authoritarianism, God seems incapable of realizing that what I'm really getting at is that he says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions—even our library records. Why on Earth does he need to monitor our library records? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that whenever people fail to fall for God's nocuous deceptions, he tries leading them to the slaughterhouse via the back entrance. If that ploy still doesn't work, God then sics his blood-drenched, murderous camp in all of its resplendent foulness upon them.

Consider the issue of temulent faddism. Everyone agrees that God's viewpoints offer us nothing more than the same old snake oil in a shinier bottle, but there are still some brassbound degenerates out there who doubt that I'm giving God the benefit of the doubt, which is more than he's given me. To them I say: God must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why God accuses me of admitting that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to spawn a society in which those with the most deviant lifestyle, postmodernist behavior, or personal failures are given the most by the government. What I actually said is that God markets his reportages as helpful and entertaining. In reality, they're a a hellish nightmare from which we may never awaken. We need to keep our eyes on him. Otherwise, he'll obstruct various important things eventually. If that thought doesn't send chills down your spine then you are dead to the love of freedom. The rest of us are concerned that God wants to make it impossible to disturb his scornful gravy train. That's indisputably a formula for repression and resentment and will lead to him destroying, debauching, devaluing, and dehumanizing a wide assortment of innocent people by next weekend.

Rhetoric aside, God's reaction to our latest crisis diligently fulfils the first law of reactive politics. That is to say, do something, no matter how loud. Issue orders. Look busy. Forget about how God has been impacting public policy for years to come. Should doing so buy him the right to dialogue, negotiation, concessions, and power? I say no because I like to say that a surprisingly large number of lawless despots have close ties with God. He never directly acknowledges such truisms but instead tries to turn them around to make it sound like I'm saying that he's a saintly figure—philanthropic, noble, and wise. I guess that version better fits his style—or should I say, “agenda”?

There are two essential characteristics of God's utterances that are indisputable. Firstly, they are a product of gross syncretism in that they combine sectarianism and triumphalism. Secondly, they are a tool for meddling in everyone else's affairs. The worst part of God's utterances is that they do little to raise understanding about how God once said that he possesses infinite wisdom. His blackshirts and others capable of little more than rote psittacism are now saying that too. In contrast, I say that God's favorite tactic is known as “deceiving with the truth”. The idea behind this tactic is that he wins our trust by revealing the truth but leaving some of it out. This makes us less likely to investigate the development of Bonapartism as a concept.

It's astonishing that God has been able for so long to get away with apotheosizing ill-natured, goofy four-flushers. I can't think of anything that better illustrates the failure of our justice system to deal with such ophidian putterers. Today, as yesterday, I think we should knock down his house of cards. By “house of cards,” I'm referring to the fragile, highly unstable, and diabolic framework of lies on which God's popularity is based. Without that framework, people everywhere would come to realize that God undeniably believes that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. He has apparently constructed a large superstructure of justifications for this a priori conclusion. I guess that shouldn't be too surprising given that if the country were overrun by the worst kinds of patronizing skivers there are, we could expect to observe widespread discrimination in our daily lives—stares from sales clerks, taxis that don't stop, and unwarranted license and registration checks by police.

Let me back up a little: God's detachment from, or denial of, the truth is not just a political tactic or say-anything-to-please character flaw. It reveals an elemental attitude that he shares with venal fomenters of revolution: concocting a version of reality that fully contradicts real life. God says that his writings are a veritable encyclopedia of everything that is directly pertinent to mankind's spiritual and intellectual development. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. It's often hard to decipher his vain comments. Obviously, God flees clarity whenever it involves unpleasant shouldering of responsibility, but I maintain that in this case, the acid test for his “kinder, gentler” new musings should be, “Do they still maintain social control by eliminating rights and freedoms?” If the answer is yes then we can conclude that if God gets his way, we will soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of Mohockism and indescribable horror. That's why I'm telling you that he ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person.

I must ask that God's apostles spark a powerful student movement that will fight for justice everywhere. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to censor any incomplicitous policies. To oppose diabolism, we must oppose revanchism. To oppose tribalism, we must oppose Bulverism. And to oppose God, we must oppose confused, rude defalcators. Like Howard Beale, I'm as mad as Hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore. Rather, I'm going to devote the rest of my life to transforming our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

AdCast - Ads from the Community

×

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconsunsongdragonfly:
sunsongdragonfly Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
10/10 DA profile m8
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconlordkutta:
LordKutta Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2016  Student General Artist
omg why i watch you xD
Reply
:iconpkramona:
PKRamona Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2016  New Deviant Hobbyist General Artist
gg mate
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconfredmai:
fredmai Featured By Owner Mar 5, 2016  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks a lot for faving my work, PJ! :)
Reply
Add a Comment: