An analysis by Joseph Farah how terrorists would not need an accurate nuclear strike to wipe out the United States but merely an electromagnetic pulse.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
In an episode of the Simpsons lampooning gender-based education, Principal Skinner is so rattled by radical feminists that by the end of the episode in despair he cries out for someone to tell him what to think.
Likewise, White Americans are constantly told that it is racist to now to judge people as individuals and even more of an outrage if we do not eagerly embrace the practices of other cultures.
However, a group of Clemson University students are being investigated for a party where malt liquor was consumed and particpants dressed as "gangstas".
Since this soiree took place off campus, why is it anymore immoral than the other drunken, tasteless shenanigins that go on in college towns across the country that we are told are no one's business except for those participating in them?
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
An interesting speech by Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily where he points out that, while the Red Chinese and Russian governments have built fallout shelters for their people, no such measures are being provided for American citizens.
While there is nothing wrong with buying any size house you want, interesting how a member of the political party making its way into power with the message that you as a regular American have too much and ought to have the vast majority of it taxed away to provide for those whose only skills include loafing about and having kids they refuse to take care of has himself purchased a 29,000 square foot mansion.
For reference purposes, if you have a house or apartment of about 1,000 square feet, that means this ambulance chases domicile is almost 30 times larger than yours.
Perhaps someone should point this out the next time Democrats drone on about us using up a disproportionate amount of the earth's resources.
by Frederick Meekins
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Rosa Parks earned her place in American iconography for refusing to go to the back of the bus. But at least she would have been permitted to remain on the bus, which would have been more than is being allowed for three Saint Paul school children who were kicked off a bus, they were initially told, because they were no longer good enough to ride the bus because they spoke English.
According to a KSTP.com titled ‘Kids kicked off a bus for speaking English”, bus service along the route in question was now reserved for students other than those speaking English because of the importance of keeping the non-English speaking pupils together.
Illegals are often of the mind now that since they supposedly pay into the tax system, that should somehow earn them a slot at the government trough. But what about boring, run of the mill citizens born here and who don’t get special holidays and entire months set aside celebrating what they happened to be upon emerging from their mother’s birth canal, aren’t they just as deserving of the services they are having increasingly high taxes taken from and assessments levied against them to pay for?
Those enamored by all things foreign and repulsed as equally by all things American will respond that these children must be kept together since they might get lost since they don’t speak English. If that’s the case, perhaps it should be the non-English speaking parents that are leveled with the responsibility of taking their children to and from school rather than the English-speaking citizen. For if we are to constantly have it thrown in our faces how those coming here came from such far-flung corners of the world, they shouldn’t have too much of a problem getting their children to school on time since they have obviously demonstrated a mastery of geography.
Scheming bureaucrats in the St. Paul case appear that they will be able to wiggle out of this one over the technicality that the aggrieved family is no longer eligible for bus service since it has been discovered that they had moved beyond the boundaries of this particular school. Interesting how this fact was not made an issue until after the pupils were kicked off the bus for the outrage of verbalizing in English.
Sticklers and regulation fetishists will drone on how the students no longer had any business on the bus and maybe they are right. However, I wonder just how many of the non-English speaking students live beyond these inviolable frontiers enforced upon the utterers of American idiom and diction; more importantly, I wonder how many have parents that aren’t even here legally.
As the nation’s schools increasingly come to resemble the linguistic confusion at the Tower of Babel where the non-English speaking come to predominate and the handouts and preferences they militate for proliferate, I wonder how many other American children across the country have been denied access to school transportation because of what manner of language flows from their lips but the parents have not stepped forward to expose the conniving of bilingualism for either fear of some kind of retaliation by multiculturalists or as the result of higher order cognitive conditioning (brainwashing) where he have had it pounded into our heads that only “racists” oppose the obliteration of America’s socio-linguistic identity.
With Black History Month just around the corner, in the coming weeks we will hear on and on about various civil rights protests such as lunch-counter sit-ins and of valiant souls asserting their God-given rights by refusing to give up their seats just because someone with a bit of authority in his belly wearing a uniform told them to. The next time a child is told they cannot board a bus or ordered to disembark for any reason other than misbehavior such as, oh lets say, because they happen to speak English or for not belonging to a specific ethnic group being granted an accommodation denied to every other child at school, they should simply refuse to comply with the order. What better way for students to learn of the importance of standing up for themselves even when its not popular with those wielding power?
Dutiful statists will shriek “How dare you instruct a fellow American to disobey non-police authority!!!!!!” But aren’t I merely encouraging them to follow the example set by either Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King?
For if you think it was OK for these Black leaders to disobey authorities that have transgressed legitimate boundaries but inappropriate for a member of the majority being disadvantaged by the ruling elite to do so, it must be pointed out that it is you, my hyperpluralist colleague, that may be the one suffering ethnocentric prejudice.
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
So as usual, it becomes the obligation of the middle class to give up their comforts while the religious and scientific elites will continue their posh lifestyles trotting around the globe to elegant conference centers telling the rest of us how we should live on the level of African tribesman.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Under a Bush proposal to be presented in the president's state of the union address, those whose health insurance plans cost employers $15,000 or more could face higher taxes if they do not switch to less costly plans.
This is being done in part to finance health insurance for those that do not now have medical coverage.
Since these deductions will be $15,000 per family and $7500 for singles, one is compelled to ask will singles with health plans costing over $7500 get hosed and left holding the bag.
Frankly, I am sick and tired of going to work so some people can go out and screw until their brains rot and return with a litany of offspring they have no intentions of taking care of.
As my grandpappy use to observe of the promiscious, if she had has many sticking out of her as in her, she'd look like a bunch of bananas. Maybe if these reprobates worked somewhere other than on their backs, they could afford their own health insurance.
by Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 19, 2007
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
It has been said that we have come as far as we have only because we stand on the shoulders of giants. One of the strengths of ethics when studied as part of a survey of Western civilization has been the discipline’s emphasis on consulting the accumulated wisdom of the past. However, in doing so one must not fail to apply these principles to the situations arising in our own time.
Talbot School of Theology Professor Scott Rae in “Moral Choices: An Introduction To Ethics” maintains this balance by not only analyzing the foundations of this field as set forth in Biblical and historical sources as well as more contemporary systems but also by examining a number of issues arising from advances in technology.
“Moral Choices” is an excellent resource for believers to investigate the complexities of this field of study since Rae does not overly advocate any one particular position per say but rather examines both sides by comparing where each either measures up to or falls short of either the outright teachings of Scripture or the traditional ethical norms derived from sacred revelation. The student will also come away with a better understanding of the legal or scientific developments giving rise to these disputes.
For example, some of the issues examined in Moral Choices include abortion, reproductive technology, human cloning, and physician assisted suicide.
In regards to abortion, Rae builds a Biblical position on the topic centering around the Fifth Commandment (Thou shalt not murder) by showing how this injunction applies to the fetus since the child in question retains a distinct personhood from conception onward until death. Rae also goes into the background of a number of court decisions establishing the legal framework for this procedure in the United States such as Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, and Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.
C.P. Snow lamented in “The Two Cultures And The Scientific Revolution” of the widening gulf between those educated in the humanities and those schooled in the hard sciences. Moral Choices does a commendable job of bridging the gap.
Often average citizens shy away from these complex issues for lack of understanding the science involved. However, by defining terms related to reproductive technologies and genetic engineering such as somatic cell gene therapy (the addition of a gene), somatic cell nuclear transfer (the taking of cells from an adult and placing them in an egg in order to grow a clone), and an overview of various infertility treatments such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection and intrafallopian transfer, “Moral Choices” won’t qualify the reader to be a Doctor Frankenstien but will certainly give the concerned laymen a better idea of what exactly goes on in the lab late at night.
Like stage magicians, often scientific and philosophical elites prefer to dazzle the common man by keeping much of the process by which they arrive at their proclamations shrouded in secrecy. “Moral Choices” by Scott Rae not only applies fundamental ethical principles to the daunting challenges facing society today but also provides the steps helping one to arrive at an informed decision.
The steps are as follows: (1) Gather the facts. (2) Determine the ethical claims. (3) Determine what principles have bearing on the case. (4) List the alternatives. (5) Compare the alternatives with the principles. (6) Consider the consequences. (7) Make a decision.
“Moral Choices: An Introduction To Ethics” begins with the question “Why Be Moral?”. From considering the ramifications of the issues examined in the text, the reader will conclude how can we afford not to?
by Frederick Meekins
On the Jan 12, 2007 edition of the Albert Mohler Program, there was an interesting discussion about several Virginia congregations withdrawing from the Episcopal Church.
Russell Moore of Southern Baptist Seminary said that, while the move is legitimate, it would be the sin of divisiveness and faction to leave a church over the matter of music.
I ask you dear reader, why must those cherishing the great hymns of the faith sit there and subject their ears to idiotic lyrics or salacicous rhythms?
Why isn't it just sometimes classier to sneak out the door never to return?
Would Dr. Moore rather these ecclesio-beatniks be run out of town on the next train?
Were that to occurr, those like him would probably lecture the rest of us as to how it is our duty to submit to those so much more "spiritual" than the rest of us.
by Frederick Meekins
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
In discussing her book Thrill Of The Chaste: Finding Fullfillment While Keeping Your Clothes On on the Albert Mohler Show, journalist Dawn Eden made an observation that many young adult or singles ministries are centered around drinking.
This author is to be commended for exposing what is probably a little known and shocking fact.
I myself came across this startling truth when I was visiting a PCA Presbyterian Church (a supposedly more conservative denomination) off and on a few years back.
Though I never attended any of the functions since I could just as easily stay home and feel like less of a total outcast since hardly anyone in the Sunday school class would hardly even speak to me at church so why bother elsewhere, it always seemed an inordinate number of the e-mail invitations for class social functions mentioned alcohol would be present.
Interestingly, this shortcoming was never brought up in class even though I was reamed a new one in discussion and in an email exchange with the Associate Pastor of the church that led the Young Adult class about my short coming of exhibiting"individualistic tendencies" and not becoming a dutiful member of the COMMUNITY, and one student from China was excoriated on the listserv for questioning the propriety of holding a babyshower for a member of the class that spawned outside of marriage.
However, the blame cannot be placed solely on the indiscretions of youth.
After all, for in this case, they are only mimicing the behavior of their elders.
And in this case, I literally mean elders. For eventually pictured on the pages of the Washington Post in a story about a men's book disucssion was a photo of two elders of this church in question boozing it up in some bar.
Though one does not like to see people injured or maimed, can you imagine the almost comic irony of a headline reading something like "Family Killed By Drunk Driver Leaving Church Function"?
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
One of the more recent James Bond movies was titled “The World Is Not Enough”. It would seem the expression also summarizes Donald Trump’s worldview and philosophy of life.
Not satisfied trying to maneuver New Orleans residents and little old ladies out of their property standing in the way of his expansive domain, the famed tycoon is now taking it upon himself to acquire the rights to the First Amendment, grant access to it to whomever he pleases, and demand the masses venerate him like some deluded Roman Emperor. Responding to remarks made by Rosie O’Donnell on The View regarding the irony of someone of Trump’s questionable reputation standing in judgment over the propriety of Miss USA’s inebriated deportment, Trump is threatening to sue.
But on what grounds does he have standing? It is pretty much public perception that Trump got his boost in life with the help of daddy’s money and that Donald has come perilously close to bankruptcy.
He must think he is so rich that he ought to be able to expunge the historical record to suit his own fancy.
If Trump is going to try and corner Rosie on something other than hurt feelings, what is it going to be? Wouldn’t for charges of slander or defamation it have to be proven that Rosie knowingly uttered false statements?
Most of the time, when the average person is ridiculed for something they have said or done (even if enunciated against them unfairly or inaccurately), we stew about it for a while and then go on our merry way. If Trump demands to be fawned over and catered to to this degree or he’s going to fly off the handle, no wonder his first two marriage didn’t last and it prompts you to speculate how long the third will endure.
If we are going to fall for the assertion that Trump’s reputation might be damaged as a result of O’Donnel’s allegations, then why isn’t he as eager to go after late night monologist Jay Leno for musing that Trump went easy on Miss USA because she has a luscious bosom? Doesn’t such a comment impinge upon Trump’s character as much as O’Donnell’s since it insinuates he’s not willing to apply rules objectively but rather stroke them for something that jiggles and catches his eye?
Does anybody in a position to do business with Donald Trump really care what Rosie O’Donnell has to say anyway? After all, they are probably just as lecherous as he is.
Those among the 49% thinking the First Amendment is an impediment to an orderly society that ought to be curtailed will argue that obnoxious louts like Rosie O’Donnell need to be reined in. Yet it must be pointed out that Trump not only responds this way to the obnoxious most would consider needing to be taken down a beg or two but also more serious journalists as well.
In Give Me A Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats, Scam Artists, And Became The Scourge Of The Liberal Media, John Stossel writes about exposing Trump’s efforts to force an elderly widow out of her home of over 30 years so that a parking lot could be built for one of his gambling dens. For daring to call the tycoon a “bully”, Stossel was warned, “Nobody talks to me that way (25).” Stossel muses that maybe someone should.
There is nothing wrong with the hyperrich accumulating vast fortunes. However, such monetary resources should not allow them to trump the basic rights of the rest of us deemed to be beneath their elevated status.
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, January 08, 2007
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Rumors are flying that there might be an 11th Doctor Who on the horizon.
One source justifying the potential tweeking of the role said, "Doctor Who is still seen as a bit geeky but Jason will add sex appeal and give the character a more dangerous edge."
Since Doctor Who has been around since the 1960's, the character must have some kind of staying power.
It has been said that the largest sex organ is the brain, so why can't the allure of a character be found in the character's personality, enthusiasm, or moral purpose?
Doctor Whos does not have to be Captain Kirk bedding every Orion slave girl he comes across.
If Doctor Who is not attractive, then why does he seem to attract a litany of female followers who drop everything to follow him in his adventures?
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
While Kevin Swanson is to be commended for pointing out the immaturity of those camped out on the sidewalk awaiting the release of the latest video game system, as usual he has allowed his youth-marriage obsession cloud what would have otherwise been an insiteful monologue.
According to Swanson, the mature young man is able to provide for a family by that age.
For starters, I like to know what he thinks the prices of real estate are these days because in my area even shacks and dumps are pushing almost $300,000 and this is to say nothing of property taxes that are on the verge of pushing the $3000 a year mark with them possibly going higher in the future if assessments continue to rise.
More importantly, seems to me that the mature young person (either male or female) would put off marriage these days realzing that the pleasures of matrimony are not worth the price of a shattered life in light of the inferior partners on the market today, many of whom are swilling in sexually transmitted diseases, dragging along children born out of wedlock in tow, and dress like prostitutes.
If a young person has kept themselves physically pure, why should they settle for someone that has not and have to provide for children they had no pleasure in producing?
The blood of Christ might wash away a multitude of sins, but it does not fuel a time machine that goes back and wipes out mistakes.
by Frederick Meekins