“No ought from is” would be
an is-statement
fundamental to any conceivable ought
(
unless the denial of all oughts including all ought-nots,
a statement of maximal possible ought-ness
derived from the non-ness of ought-ness,
no-ought from not,
ought ought-not from is not,
anti-ought ought from not-is is.
)
.
No one who believes it means it,
as meaning is the ought of is,
without which there could be
neither belief nor who,
and therefore neither being
(
much less
nothing
)
nor statement.
What purposes are served
by the presumption of purposelessness?
). Go to our 
Ought-O lives! Love the parentheticals. (0: I know that symbol there just ruined everything–which is the ought-to, or ought-2 point. I didn’t make it up. It’s just the goofier, clown with a nose version of the smiley face text symbol. As opposed to sad-clown… )0:
(0: