Copy And Paste Text In The Box Above For Audio

"Logic lets us start from clearly defined premises, examine how they connect, and draw conclusions that follow".

The Founding Fathers Of America Had No Idea The Religious Atheist Sect Of Atheist Marxism Would Present Itself In Later Years. They Identified Atheist As Atomist and/or Humanist Who  At That Time, Prior Atheist Marxism, Very Compatible With Spiritual And Religious Peoples.

Separation Of Church And State Was And Still Is The Only Guard Against A Religious Theocracy From Becoming The Rulers In Government. America Has Evolved To Have People In Elected Positions With Different Tempraments, Talents, Races, Religions, Sex and Experience Providing A Benchmark Of How A Secular Society Can Govern Itself. With Different Spiritual And Religious Beliefs. 

Below is A Intel Brief From Overseas Which Identifies America Had Better Accept The Truth Of What Those In Atheist Marxist Nations Already Are Of Understanding.

Partial CEAF‑AM (Co‑Existence Assessment Framework – Atheist Marxism) Purpose: 
To gauge how closely each sovereign state’s governing system matches the core characteristics of an “atheist‑Marxist” model. This model is defined by five observable dimensions that together capture the political‑ideological, institutional, and economic profile associated with Atheistic Marxist governance.

Total Score Category Meaning
0 to10 Misaligned
Governing system is fundamentally at odds with the Atheist‑Marxist model
11 to18 Partial Alignment 
Some elements resemble the atheist‑Marxist approach, but major gaps remain
19 to25 Strong Alignment 
Core institutions, ideology, and economic management closely mirror the atheist‑Marxist system

Results - Strong Alignment – only 5 countries  (≈ 2.6 %) reach the highest tier.
Partial Alignment – 13 countries (≈ 6.7 %) fall in the middle band.
Misaligned – the overwhelming majority, 177 countries (≈ 90.8 %), score 0‑10.

Strong Alignment (19 to 25) – 5 countries (Cambodia, Laos, Eritrea, Syria, Vietnam, Yemen)
Partial Alignment (11 to 18) – 13 states(Belarus, Cuba, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam)
Misaligned (0 to 10) – 177 countries (the vast majority of the world’s countries) 
How to interpret the results 

Strong Alignment – Governance structures, ideological controls, and state‑led economies closely mirror the atheist‑Marxist model. These states are natural partners for initiatives that stem from that paradigm (e.g., coordinated infrastructure projects, shared digital‑sovereignty standards) and often align with one another in multilateral fora.

Partial Alignment – Significant overlap in one or two dimensions (e.g., strong party control but a more market‑oriented economy). Such states may cooperate on specific projects while retaining independent foreign‑policy levers.

Misaligned – Little resemblance to the atheist‑Marxist system; these countries typically emphasize liberal democratic institutions, open markets, and multiculturalism that diverge from the model’s core tenets.