Check out the trailer to my soon-to-be-released short film, Reflections!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFRkFmxp5m8

My mind is always in complete chaos. I don't always make sense. It's hard to understand the way I think. I don't even understand the way I think. If I wasn't driven by this chaos, and I wasn't able to turn it into awesomeness (and instead turned it into degeneracy), I believe I'd be clinically insane, clinically fucked up in the mind as it were. Though, those are just assumptions. A lot of people claim to be mentally ill, because it either gives them an excuse to not be awesome, or it gives them some sympathy indie cred. I claim it with the purest intentions. I seek neither an excuse nor sympathy. I merely make a claim I believe, based on the evidence at hand, to be true.

What sane person goes into a Southern flea market (do they even exist elsewhere? I've only ever really been to any in the South) and ponders the merits of cannibalism?

I embrace the chaos. I don't let it ruin me (often). I don't let it control me. I let it guide me, but ultimately I make the decisions; I make the choices, assuming we actually have free will. The older I become, the more random things I do become. I've randomly decided to just turn around while I'm walking and go another way. Why? Because it seemed to make sense to me.

I do in fact randomly break out into song and dance. Why? Because I fucking can, and it seems to make sense.

Yet I still disgust myself with the pragmatic order I force upon my mind and my life. I absolutely must. I must seek some resemblance of order so I don't fall completely into madness and am unable to be my standardly awesome (self titled) self.

But why? Why does this society embrace the norm? Why does this society embrace the sane? The insane are the ones with the real ideas. We're the ones who are advancing mankind (well, the only think you can say about mankind is that there's nothing kind about man). It is we who advance philosophy, not the norm. It is we who advance the very society that looks down on us, not the norm. It is we who produce geniuses, not the norm.

A genius, by definition, must be insane. A genius must view the world and everything in it vastly different than the perceived norm, which can easily be classified as insanity, a.k.a. a derangement of the mind.

Do I claim I am a genius? I have no clue. I have yet to put myself in a position to prove myself in any significant way. Do I view the world vastly differently than the accepted norm? Hell to the fucking yes.

I think for myself as often as I can, therefore I do not fit the norm, I fit the chaos.
I quite literally decide on many things quite randomly, therefore I do not fit the norm, I fit the chaos.

I look at the chaos of the film industry I so desire to enter. My reaction is a simple, "Bring. It. On. Bitch."
I look at the chaos of the world I so desperately strive to remain a part of. My reaction is a simple, "Bring. It. On. Bitch."

Do not mistake this for a lack of fear. I still fear a great many things, but that's part of the chaos. It wouldn't be chaos without a gentlemanly representative from the great state of Fearslyvania.

I think not in your silly restricted words. Your thoughts that are in words bind you to simplicity and order in a field where there ought to be none whatsoever!

Unscrew the locks from the doors! Unscrew the doors themselves from their jambs!

Fucking join me in the chaos.

Fucking join me in the destruction of everything you once knew.

The chaos demands this town for death.

This is a mortal wound, doctor.

So, for those who don't know, the simplified version of my religious thought is atheism. I reject every single faith that has been completely been brought up, and my personal beliefs are essentially that the divine doesn't exist. I do not completely reject the notion of the divine, as there is always the possibility I might be wrong.

Nonetheless, I have something that I honestly haven't heard while discussing religion with many people both offline and online. Why is the burden of proof not often taken into consideration in religious debate?

Naturally, there is no religious thought and belief. That is a product of the human development of imagination: our ability to care about the world outside of our immediate surroundings. Thus, the people who are claiming to have religious belief and are claiming to be right are the people who make the first claim, since before them there was no claim of any kind. Thus, the burden of proof would be on the people who claim religious beliefs and the existence of a god, correct?

My atheism is simply a response to the claim of atheism, but the burden of proof is not on me to prove a religious person wrong. I am not the one making the first claim.

Thoughts?

Prove that God exists and get a cookie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgsHc-UHvQ8