The Atheist Ten Commandments

by Grania

CNN has a piece on a contest run on the Atheist Heart, Humanist Mind site where atheists were asked to submit modern alternatives to the original set in Exodus and Deuteronomy.

CNN opines:

There’s nary a “thou shalt” among them — nothing specifically about murder, stealing or adultery, although there is a version of the Golden Rule, which presumably would cover those crimes.

If they lack faith in the divine, the atheist “non-commandments” display a robust faith in humankind, as if Silicon Valley had replaced Sinai.

Silicon Valley, eh?

These are the winners:


Those sound reasonable, although I don’t know if atheists really need a reminder about God not being necessary, I would have thought that was a given. But perhaps they intended this for a wider audience. I like the fact that it favors critical thinking, scientific discovery but also strives to foster an environment that promotes human rights and protects human liberties.

There is a little more explanation for these choices over here.

What do you think, is there anything you would change or that you think is missing?


  1. NewEnglandBob
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    Banana sub

    • HaggisForBrains
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:08 am | Permalink

      With peanut butter.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:27 am | Permalink


        • infiniteimprobabilit
          Posted December 20, 2014 at 4:25 pm | Permalink


          • Posted December 21, 2014 at 12:46 am | Permalink

            Ding dong.

          • Posted December 21, 2014 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

            The Indian god of fruit?


            • infiniteimprobabilit
              Posted December 22, 2014 at 3:33 am | Permalink


              When I was in Fiji on holiday I had to remember (not that it came up very often) that the supremo was called Bainimarama and NOT Bananarama. I’m not sure if it would have been an indictable offence but I didn’t want to find out.

  2. Robert MacDonald
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    They’re awfully blandly worded. Christopher Hitchens’ ten commandments by contrast have a lot of kick.

    • KenS
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:13 am | Permalink

      I’m so glad I decided to check out the comments on this post – I didn’t know Mr. Hitchens had formulated his own ten commandments. I agree with Mr. McDonald: Hitchens provide some useful guidance with just a touch of levity.

      • HaggisForBrains
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:19 am | Permalink

        Love #8!

      • Wunold
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

        Hitchens’ 8th commandment is the most important one ever! 😀

        (No, I won’t spare you listening to, or reading all of them. :p )

      • Dawn Oz
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

        Thank you for this excellent resource – I shall file it and pass it on.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:00 am | Permalink

      Right. Nor are they “commandments.” They’re dicta at best, platitudes at worst.

      • Heather Hastie
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:50 am | Permalink

        Yeah. There are a lot of great atheist writers – I’m sure they could have written these in a more inspiring and imaginative way. There’s not a lot wrong with the actual “commandments”, but they lack a bit of style.

        I’ve thought about doing this a few times, but because my efforts come across a bit like the ones above, I’ve never subjected others to them.

      • Sastra
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

        Ah, the results of a committee!

      • Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

        I think they’re pretty good – if you realize they’re not really meant to be a functional set of rules that must be consulted before taking any kind of action in your life.

        I’d say the primary function of this exercise is to try to show theists that their “god-given” pre/proscriptions are ridiculous and that we humans are eminently capable of determining guidelines that are more relevant and more likely to result in peaceful coexistence.

        • darrelle
          Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

          I think that’s a “BINGO!”

          I think the whole idea of “Commandments,” as in the traditional xian context, is repulsive. It encapsulate’s some of the major aspects of religion, Christianity specifically of course, that cause so much trouble and hold societies back.

  3. bobkillian
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    Don’t blindly follow commandments. Be a thinking person, not a sheep.

    • GBJames
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:56 am | Permalink

      Is that a command?

      • bobkillian
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:07 am | Permalink

        Yep. It’s two physicians.

  4. Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:00 am | Permalink


  5. alexandra
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    yes, leave the word God out- or at the very least by rewording the sentence , spell it with a small case g.

    • Mark R.
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

      Or say “The gods are not necessary…” Since god here is the beginning of the sentence, the “g” would be capitalized anyway. So another suggestion would be “A god is not necessary…” But as pointed out, this “command” is self-evident to an atheist.

      • Todd
        Posted December 21, 2014 at 8:16 am | Permalink

        “A god” would be the way to go. The way the sentence read implies that “God” does exist, but that “God” isn’t necessary for creating morality.

  6. Barney
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    The CNN Religion Editor said “There’s nary a “thou shalt” among them”. How sad that a professional writer (as ‘editor’, he probably gets to affect other people’s writing too – that’s really worrying) doesn’t understand what the imperative is, and that ‘thou shalt’ is effectively at the start of each use of it (though without the archaic implications of ‘thou’, of course). So 1,2, 6, 7 and 10 could all start ‘thou shalt’ if you wanted them to.

    • rickflick
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      Yes, I noticed that. The statement is meaningless fog. It gives me the impression the Editor is a lazy thinker. I think that comes from the daily requirement to please an uncritical readership. I mean people who are comforted by reading cliches sprinkled liberally through every piece of writing.

  7. James Walker
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:18 am | Permalink

    I would boil it down to two:

    Think for yourself.

    Treat other people the way you would like to be treated.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:45 am | Permalink

      Treat other people the way they want to be treated.

      • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:25 am | Permalink

        Actually, the one I’d put first: do not do unto others as they do not wish to be done unto, except as minimally necessary to prevent them from doing unto others as they don’t wish to be done unto.

        A bit wordy, but it covers basically everything worth having in any criminal code.

        And after that, I’d put the Christian formulation, of do unto others as you’d like them to do unto you. So long as it’s secondary to that first one, that gets you all the cooperative aspects of society that are selfishly of interest to you — and it’s that selfish part that’ll make you interested in the first place.

        Lastly, a bit from Wicca: An it harm none, do what thou wilt. Be free, knock yourself silly; just don’t hurt anybody else in the process — and only after you’ve finished your chores.



      • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:30 am | Permalink

        Some people want to be treated like royalty.

        • Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:31 am | Permalink

          Some people do not like the same things I do.

    • Grania Spingies
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:23 am | Permalink

      I’m don’t think “Think for yourself” is enough. It’s too easy to move from that position to almost any woo, pseudoscience or myth. It has to have a caveat like number 2 accompanying it.

      • Sastra
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

        I agree, and spotted that right off. I’ve seen it used too often to justify going completely off the rails of rationality into the fields of foolishness. Same with “there is no one right way to live.” It’s perfectly reasonable when kept in the genuine bounds of ‘lifestyle’ — but given that faith merges identity with conclusion I’ve seen that one abused, too.

        The problem with setting out rules for critical thinkers is that you just know they’re going to get picked apart to death.

      • GBJames
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

        You’re right, of course.

  8. Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:19 am | Permalink

    Always remember that the Universe is indifferent to us. Make your life count for something good and kind.

  9. Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    Frankly, I think they are a pretty disappointing pile of vapidity. 1 and 2 are basically saying the same thing. 3, 4 and 5 are assertions. 6, 7 and 8 could easily be conflated. 9 is totally pointless. It’s implicit in 6/7/8. And 10 is a platitude.

    Overall, it seems they offer an excellent target for theists to shoot at.

    • h2ocean
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:38 am | Permalink

      Yes my thoughts as well. We often criticize the first 3-4 in the original ten commandments as not being about morality at all and just worshiping god. Then they basically did the same thing but with reason and science. This is obviously a clear improvement, but still…

      We also often criticize for the original for not taking on slavery, one of the few things we have basically universally rejected as a species, but then nothing about murder or rape. I guess you can infer anti-rape in #4, but if we were to imagine these being passed down over millenia, we need to be clear in our wording! 😉

      I guess it depends on what the purpose of commandments are. If it is supposed to be “here are 10 universal morals that you should follow”, then it should include even obvious things like murder and slavery (sadly, I don’t think rape is all that obvious to everyone in our world, and definitely needs to be included). If it is meant to be “society is a mess so here are some new rules to follow that maybe you don’t know about” then maybe you can do without slavery and murder; there is no need to tell us as we already know they are bad.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

      I like them, as I wrote above.

      For a list of guidelines to be palatable to freethinkers, it’s going to have to avoid very specific pre/proscriptions. It’s going to have to be very general, even vague. So it’s very likely to come across as obvious or even vapid.

      The point of this exercise, as I wrote above, is not to tell us in great detail how we *must* live our lives, but to stand in contrast to the irrelevant at best, harmful at worst commandments theists point to.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

      I’m especially unhappy with 4 which appears to be a thinly-veiled statement on abortion but fails to achieve this by not defining the body.

      And then there’s 5, which rules out listening to god but doesn’t tell us to avoid unicorns, leprechauns, and my fairy god-mother.


      • PeacePecan
        Posted December 21, 2014 at 8:52 am | Permalink

        The definition of “body” should be uncontroversial.
        The word that needs defining is “person”.

      • marvol19
        Posted December 22, 2014 at 8:55 am | Permalink

        It does also cover euthanasia.
        And FGM. And circumcision.

        But still it’s a highly specific rule that seems covered adequately by “don’t treat others as they do not want to be treated” (and Ben Goren’s caveat).

  10. Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    For me, they all boil down to rules #2 and #7. No need to match that number of 10 just because it’s in the bible.
    Actually, now thinking about it, #2 is optional – everyone’s entitled to their own life. As long as they adhere to #7 which is of course nothing else than Kant’s categorical imperative.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:33 am | Permalink

      Actually, I’ve just re-read Kant’s formulation, which I haven’t done in quite a long time, and again I found it so profoundly beautiful that I’ll just throw it in here:

      “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.”

      I don’t see, what’s needed beyond that.

      • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:42 am | Permalink

        Unfortunately, that allows for an entirely self-centric interpretation: I am the lord thy god, etc. and everyone else should act as if that’s true.

        • Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:57 am | Permalink

          Actually, it doesn’t. Read it again.

          • Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:02 am | Permalink

            I read it several times before posting. I don’t see that my cynical interpretation can be rejected without further qualifying statements or assumptions.

            • Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

              Well, suppose Kant’s imperative (which by nature is unconditional) is generally agreed upon.

              So, you come along and proclaim yourself to be Ming the Merciless, Ruler of the Universe (RotU for short). The categorical imperative doesn’t say, that it then should be a universal law that you are in fact RotU. It says, that by doing so, you accept that the maxim of your action (proclaiming oneself RotU) should be a universal law, which means that you should have no problem if everyone does it. Which you probably would have rather soon.

              So it voids all purely self-centric actions immediately as you could hardly wish everyone to act purely self-centric. Another more realistic example: Should you doge fares because you’d rather spend the money on beer? Well if you did, you’d accept that anyone should be entitled to do so, and public transport would be gone in no time.

            • Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

              Another remark: As I wrote in my first comment, rule #7 of the “winners” in the original post is sort of a popular rephrasing of Kant’s categorical imperative. Kant’s language is much more technical and far-reaching, but in many cases you can think of the CI as “treat others the way you’d like them to treat you too”.

              And here’s another interesting re-formulation of the CI (again by old Kant himself): “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”

  11. Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    Here’s my top 10

    Thou shalt worship only reason
    Thou shalt abstain from injecting deities
    and demons in the affairs of Nature
    Thou shalt disdain all ritual and pretense
    Thou shalt abhor priestliness
    Thou shalt loathe superstition
    Thou shalt reject all forms of
    spiritualism and supernaturalism
    Thou shalt regard skepticism as a virtue
    Thou shalt reject all claims to a
    moral authority greater than humankind
    Thou shalt reject racism and sexism
    Thou shalt, in word and deed, strive to
    improve the human condition

    • NewEnglandBob
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:27 am | Permalink

      I disagree on “disdain all ritual”.

      It depends on what the rituals are. A ritual of an extended family getting together every Thanksgiving is just fine. So is playing bridge or canasta every wednesday evening.

      I do get annoyed at the ritual of tightening a batting glove before every major league pitch for some batters (yes, I mean you David Ortiz).

      • Nwalsh
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:48 am | Permalink

        Well get used to it because Pablo does it and more: draws lines in batters box, bops himself on the helmet when he swings at ball four etc.Will miss him though.

  12. Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    New here. Very interesting site. I agree the CNN list could be boiled down to a couple of lines (probably #2 and #7).

    But for #7, I prefer this version of the “Golden Rule”: Do not do unto others as you would not have others do unto you.

    The “treat others as you would want to be treated” version seems to drive proselytizers to my door.

  13. Frankensense
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    I’ve always liked ‘Never deny others a right you would claim for yourself’.

    • Heather Hastie
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:55 am | Permalink

      That’s a really good one. 🙂

      • Keith Cook or more
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

        I agree, this would have saved humanity untold misery.

    • Marella
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

      The wealthy aren’t going to like this one, far too egalitarian.

  14. darrelle
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Number 3 is annoying. I agree with the jist of it, but “natural world” is a big problem for me. It is a weasel term that leaves the door wide open for believers. Very accommodationist. I would much prefer replacing it with something like “reality.” Or “all aspects of reality.”

    “Most reliable” is somewhat troublesome too. Science, or at least the basic methodologies formalized in what we call Science, is the only way to determine which models are correct with an accuracy greater than chance.

  15. Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    People tend to quibble about which version of the Golden Rule is best and point out how certain interpretations can lead to undesirable results.

    I think, though, that it’s most useful not as a rule to be implemented legalistically, but as simply a caution to think about the perspective of others before you act.

  16. Paul Webber
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    I think we only need 2 commandments…. and as a freethinker… maybe only suggestions…

    be responsible

    be kind

    that’s it… 🙂

    • Mark Joseph
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

      Add “be knowledgeable” to your list, and I am complete agreement.

      • darrelle
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

        Don’t be a tool?

        • Posted December 20, 2014 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

          That covers a lot of bases:-)

  17. peepuk
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    I think anyone will agree
    these additional commandments would make above list more complete:
    11) live and let live.
    12) don’t worry much.
    13) make love, as much as you can
    14) don’t start a war if you are not sure you gonna win
    15) joke about everything anytime
    16) there is only one god and that’s you
    17) prefer dogs above cats

    • Sastra
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

      I see you especially like #15.

      • peepuk
        Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

        nice reply,
        no order is important

        • peepuk
          Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

          should be:
          no, order is important

          • infiniteimprobabilit
            Posted December 20, 2014 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

            Obviously, comma is important


  18. Sastra
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    With the exception of #5 many if not most theists would and could come up with a similar list — even the conservatives. That’s partly because they’re good general rules for living and partly because a religious person might interpret the rule in a different way.

    For one thing, believers almost always think they ARE open-minded, unbiased, responsible, thoughtful, considerate, and concerned with improving the future. Science is limited to understanding the natural world and the rights to your own body extend to fertilized eggs.

    My guess is that if people were randomly asked to come up with a list of 10 rules to live by and nothing was said or noted about religion either way in the question they’d probably arrive at something not all that different.

    My guess at the step most religious people will object to: #9 — “There is no one right way to live.”

    That’s because they’re going to be lightning quick on including things like drug addiction, serial killing, theft, and genocide in the list of “way people choose to live” and argue that this means “anything goes” in a world which is now a hellhole of violence, cruelty, and exploitation. Just what atheists really want, you know, when they ‘choose’ to go to Hell.

    • Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

      Yes, which is why I like the list. If they’re honest with themselves, even theists will admit that this list is superior. It shows how much more vapid the actual decalogue is.

      Theists certainly operate by many of these principles in day to day life. It’s often only when formally asked that they insist not making graven images and keeping the sabbath holy are the height of morality.

      • Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

        Hit post too soon. Meant to conclude with:

        In his day and age, most of is have better “lists” available to us via our instincts.

    • peepuk
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

      I would object to 1 as well. A naive person is openminded, but I wouldn’t be recommend that level. Skepticism is as important as openmindness (my opinion).

      As a hard-determinist I am not able to obey commandment 8. 6 is also a little suspect.

      Fascist, communist and religious people have tried 10 but often failed.

  19. Randy Schenck
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    One thing we can say for certain is that the 10 commandments of Moses had nothing to do with or influence over the people who created our government here in America. Although many christians like to say otherwise, the facts show exactly the opposite.

    History shows us a much more likely set of ethical principals by Solon several hundred years before the Moses moment. They were not perfect but made far more sense to our set of government foundations than anything found in the bible. The Pagans of Greece were much closer to what we were after.

  20. Posted December 20, 2014 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    Be kind.

    Recognise & embrace moments of happiness.

    Put away the iPhone cam – see the real & now.

    You DON’T have a book in you – aim for a pithy pamphlet.

    Your personal drama of the day isn’t interesting & will prove to be unimportant. It’s your round by the way.

    Buy in bulk.

  21. Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    Remember that morality is the manifestation of evolved behavioral traits, and has no objective existence as a thing-in-itself.

    • peepuk
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

      sure you are right,
      but these list are trying to make atheism look more like religion. Isn’t that a good thing :)?

  22. Keith Cook or more
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    I like, this is our home, our planet, we are animals and along with all life forms on it, in it and living in it’s atmosphere it needs our cooperation and interest weighted against self interest… otherwise we will all be non animals.
    As a anti theist I find trying to find alternatives to these decrepit ancient mutterings a irksome exercise, sorry, (you too Mr Hitchens) especially now that we are on discoveries of the brain and behaviours that may force us to rethink moral behavioural rules that have nothing to do with a man with a beard and a stone tablet.

  23. Adam M.
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    I find #4 to be amusing/interesting. Given that nearly every government has laws regulating what people can eat, drink, and smoke, how and with whom they can have sex, what they can say and where they can say it, when and how women can have abortions, etc. it’s clearly not the case that all people have a right to control their own bodies.

    We may wish it was true, but perhaps it may never be.

  24. Mark Sturtevant
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    All very well, but I see two issues.
    a) None of the atheist commandments actually expresses the view that there is no evidence for god or for gods.
    b) Many of the commandments are about humanism, not atheism.

  25. Posted December 20, 2014 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

    Regarding #7, AC Grayling made a great point that we shouldn’t treat others as we want to be treated, because they may not like it! Rather, we shouldn’t treat others in a way we wouldn’t want to be treated.

    It’s only a slight rephrasing, but it significantly changes the implication!

    • smallthingconsidered
      Posted December 20, 2014 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

      Or, as Walter Kaufmann once wrote, try to formulate a sexual ethic based on ‘do unto others…’.

  26. Posted December 20, 2014 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    “Do unto others as THEY WANT to be done unto, or else leave ’em the heck alone (at least to the extent that they will let you leave them alone by leaving you alone)” is sufficient for me as the sole bedrock ethical “commandment” (ALL OTHER rationally meritorious ethical principles can easily be derived from this one, it seems preeminently clear to me).

  27. Amy Bean
    Posted December 20, 2014 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    How can you generalize about what all atheists think/value? All the term means is that a person does not believe in a god. I don’t assume that all or even most atheists share my values associated with the scientific process, critical thinking, evidence, skepticism and humanism, though I wish ALL people did. Atheists are as diverse as any “group,” I suspect.

  28. Jeff Chamberlain
    Posted December 21, 2014 at 12:25 am | Permalink

    Regarding #8, why do we have a responsibility to future generations?

    • Wunold
      Posted December 21, 2014 at 3:29 am | Permalink

      We may have it out of humanism and because we normally live to see 2-3 generations ourselves.

      Ultimately, our genes “want” it for ongoing procreation. 🙂

    • Posted December 21, 2014 at 9:15 am | Permalink

      The world is a beautiful place and we have no right to deprive our children of that beauty.

      It’s another version of #7 (treat others as you would like to be treated) and #10 (leave the world a better place).

      It follows that we have no right to drive species to extinction or to pollute or to melt the icecaps, etc.

  29. Posted December 21, 2014 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Reblogged this on Rainbowman56's Blog.

  30. Posted December 22, 2014 at 1:42 am | Permalink


  31. Posted December 23, 2014 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    Hey Dr. Coyne, thank you for your thoughtful blog post about my book and our ReThink prize contest to crowdsource an updated 10 Commandments. I’m a big fan of your work, so I was quite flattered to see you covering us.



  32. Posted January 5, 2015 at 8:12 am | Permalink

    Late entry (if anyone’s still paying attention)… 

    Cicero said:

    Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century:

    – Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others;
    – Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected;
    – Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it;
    – Refusing to set aside trivial preferences;
    – Neglecting development and refinement of the mind;
    – Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do.

    Which might be inverted to provide “commandments”:

    Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century:

    – Do not crush others for personal gain;
    – Do not worry about things that cannot be changed or corrected;
    – Do not insist that a thing is impossible because we cannot (yet) accomplish it;
    – Set aside trivial preferences;
    – Develop and refine your mind (and others’);
    – Do not attempt to compel others to believe and live as we do.


    • bobkillian
      Posted January 5, 2015 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

      The fundamental problem with Commandments is that some lawgiver is commanding them.

      Wouldn’t it be better if we had the 10 Agreements? E.g., Let’s all agree that you shouldn’t harm other people for personal gain. Let’s not push our beliefs on others uninvited ….

      • Posted January 5, 2015 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

        Indeed! The /x/ Concordats. 😉

        I did think of commenting on the irony of the sixth “commandment”.


One Trackback/Pingback

  1. […] […]

%d bloggers like this: